Macedonia Cedefop PDF

EN EN
On the way to 2020:

On the way to 2020:
data for vocational education data for vocational education
and training policies
Country statistical overviews
Update 2013 Country statistical overviews
Update 2013
European policy-making in vocational education
3066 EN – TI-RF-13-002-EN-C
and training (VET) needs to be supported by sound
quantitative information.
Cedefop has selected a set of 32 statistical
indicators to quantify key aspects of VET
and lifelong learning, based on their policy
relevance and importance for achieving the Europe
2020 objectives. The aim is to help describe,
monitor and compare countries.
This update incorporates new hard evidence from
the European statistical system.
The indicators do not claim to assess national
systemsor policies but should be used as headline
figures for reflecting on progress towards the
strategic objectives set for Europe.
The indicators take 2010 as the baseline year and
present statistical overviews for the 28 European
Union Member States and the former Yugoslav
Republic of Macedonia, Iceland, Norway,
Switzerland and Turkey.
European Centre for the Development

of Vocational Training
Europe 123, 570 01 Thessaloniki (Pylea), GREECE

PO Box 22427, 551 02 Thessaloniki, GREECE
Tel. +30 2310490111, Fax +30 2310490020, E-mail: info@cedefop.europa.eu
On the way to 2020:
data for vocational education

Update 2013
Cedefop Reference series; 97

Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2014
A great deal of additional information on the European Union
is available on the Internet.
It can be accessed through the Europa server (http://europa.eu).
Cataloguing data can be found at the end of this publication.
Luxembourg:
Publications Office of the European Union, 2014
ISBN 978-92-896-1444-3
ISSN 1608-7089
doi: 10.2801/54941
©European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training, 2014

All rights reserved.
Printed in the European Union

The European Centre for the Development
of Vocational Training (Cedefop) is the European Union’s
reference centre for vocational education and training.
We provide information on and analyses of vocational
education and training systems, policies, research and practice.
Cedefop was established in 1975
by Council Regulation (EEC) No 337/75.

Tel. +30 2310490111, Fax +30 2310490020
E-mail: info@cedefop.europa.eu
www.cedefop.europa.eu
James J. Calleja, Director

Barbara Dorn, Chair of the Governing Board
Foreword
This report provides an updated statistical This second edition results from continuing
overview of vocational education and training (VET) efforts to update, review and improve key indicators
and lifelong learning in European countries. These as new and better data become available. It helps
country statistical snapshots illustrate progress disseminate the freshest relevant data in a concise
on indicators selected for their policy relevance and user-friendly way, as did the previous edition.
and contribution to Europe 2020 objectives. The Data are based on international statistics
indicators provide country-based evidence on: enabling comparisons of countries and statistical
averages for the EU. The overviews comprise
continuous VET; investment, skill developments 32 carefully selected indicators that, separately
and labour market relevance in VET; and labour and together, provide relevant information about
market transitions and employment trends. They the position of each country in relation to the
offer a review of progress in key areas of education priorities of European VET and lifelong learning
and training policy in Europe. policy. Indicators are supplemented by a short
commentary highlighting particularly interesting
Cedefop publication, On the way to 2020: data points of information for each country.
for vocational education and training policies: This publication is, in consequence, a valuable
country statistical overviews (Cedefop, 2013). It tool to help policy-makers understand and assess
incorporates new hard evidence from the European the situation in each European country.
statistical system, including the latest rounds of
the continuing vocational training survey and the Joachim James Calleja
adult education surveys, as well as most recent Director
updates from the EU labour force survey and the
UOE data collection on education. Latest data
from Cedefop skills supply and demand forecasts
are also considered.
On the way to 2020:
6 data for vocational education and training policies
Acknowledgements
This report is the result of a team effort, with contributions from
Cedefop colleagues under the supervision of Pascaline Descy
(Head of Research and Policy Analysis). Marco Serafini
coordinated the project. Steve Bainbridge and Mircea Badescu
provided valuable input and suggestions throughout. Cedefop is
grateful to Arie Gelderblom (SEOR, Erasmus University
Rotterdam), Marion Collewet (SEOR), Lynn Gambin and Terence
Hogarth (both at the Institute for Employment Research, University
of Warwick) for drafting the report and providing conceptual,
methodological, statistical and technical contributions to the
selection, presentation and management of various data.
Assistance was also provided by Dan Dinu, Matthijs de Jong,
Martina Korudova (all SEOR) Andrew Holden and Rob Wilson (IER).
The work was carried out under

Cedefop’s service contract
No AO/RPA/MSERA-ALSTI/VET
Statistical overview/009/11.
Table of contents
Foreword ...................................................................................................................................... 5
Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 8
Part I
Member States of the European Union
1. Belgium ............................................................................................................................. 17
2. Bulgaria .............................................................................................................................. 20
3. The Czech Republic ......................................................................................................... 23
4. Denmark ............................................................................................................................ 26
5. Germany ............................................................................................................................ 29
6. Estonia ............................................................................................................................... 32
7. Ireland ................................................................................................................................ 35
8. Greece ............................................................................................................................... 38
9. Spain .................................................................................................................................. 41
10. France ................................................................................................................................ 44
11. Croatia ............................................................................................................................... 47
12. Italy ..................................................................................................................................... 50
13. Cyprus ............................................................................................................................... 53
14. Latvia ................................................................................................................................. 56
15. Lithuania ............................................................................................................................ 59
16. Luxembourg ...................................................................................................................... 62
17. Hungary ............................................................................................................................. 65
18. Malta .................................................................................................................................. 68
19. The Netherlands .............................................................................................................. 71
20. Austria ............................................................................................................................... 74
21. Poland ............................................................................................................................... 77
22. Portugal ............................................................................................................................. 80
23. Romania ............................................................................................................................ 83
24. Slovenia ............................................................................................................................. 86
25. Slovakia ............................................................................................................................. 89
26. Finland ............................................................................................................................... 92
27. Sweden .............................................................................................................................. 95
28. The United Kingdom ....................................................................................................... 98
Part II
Selected EFTA and candidate countries
29. The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia ............................................................. 103
30. Iceland ............................................................................................................................... 106
31. Norway .............................................................................................................................. 109
32. Switzerland ....................................................................................................................... 112
33. Turkey ................................................................................................................................ 115
References ................................................................................................................................... 118

Annex 1 .......................................................................................................................................... 119
Annex 2 .......................................................................................................................................... 123
Introduction
Aim Selecting and grouping

core indicators
European policy-making and analysis in vocational The key questions for the core indicators were what
education and training (VET) need to be informed they should show and which data sources to use.
and supported by sound qualitative and quantitative European VET policy priorities and benchmarks
information. are wide ranging (see Box) and context issues
This report, as a follow up of a previous
Cedefop publication (On the way to 2020: data for general education and labour market and
vocational education and training policies: country socioeconomic situations, are also important.
statistical overviews (Cedefop, 2013)) updates Taking these priorities and context issues, and
and complements a concise set of core statistical using the European and international statistical
indicators, quantifying key aspects of VET and infrastructure, (1) more than 140 ideal qualitative
lifelong learning to help describe, monitor and
compare European countries and their progress. indicators include those that would be desirable
The indicators, selected for their policy relevance to improve monitoring of VET and lifelong learning,
as well as their importance for achieving the but for which data are not available.
objectives of the Europe 2020 strategy, have been From the initial 140, 31 core indicators were
initially selected with an additional one was added
new hard evidence from the European statistical in this second edition. The selection was based
system, including the latest rounds of the on three factors. First, the indicators should be
continuing vocational training survey and the adult quantitative, from available good-quality data.
education surveys, as well as most recent updates Qualitative progress, for example legislative or
from the EU labour force survey and the UOE data other policy changes introduced by Member
collection on education systems. Latest data from States to reform VET, are important, but are best
Cedefop skills supply and demand forecasts are covered in policy reports rather than a restricted
also considered. set of indicators. Second, the indicators should
Taking 2010 as the baseline year, to coincide focus on VET and its contribution to European VET
with the launch of the strategy and the revised policy and Europe 2020 employment, education
European VET policy framework, 32 core indicators and training benchmarks. Third, the indicators
are published as ‘statistical overviews’ of each
country: the 28 European Union (EU) Member and its data source are in Annex 1.
States and, where data are available, for the former The core indicators do not have a one-to-one
Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Iceland, Norway, relationship with the different policy themes;
Switzerland and Turkey. The format is intended to such a link is not always helpful as some themes
be easy to use and data are supplemented with overlap. Others are too complex to be reduced to
a commentary highlighting interesting points for one or two indicators while, for other themes, data
each country. are unavailable or poor quality.
The core indicators do not claim to assess Rather than each indicator being linked directly
national systems or policies. Statistics have their to a theme, to ensure their coherence and
limitations: they can oversimplify complex issues; relevance to European VET policy as a whole, the
to be properly understood they must be read in core indicators have been grouped under the three
context; and there are inevitable time lags. The broad headings discussed below.
overviews. Detailed monitoring requires much

more data, detailed breakdowns and thorough
analysis.
Introduction 9
European VET policy:

quantitative benchmarks and qualitative priorities
Needing to modernise education and training systems, the European Union (EU) launched the Copenhagen process in 2002 to strengthen
strengthen
cooperation in VET. To build on progress, in 2010, at Bruges, the European Commission, the Member States and social partners established
a new framework for European VET policy for 2010-20, which included qualitative priorities to support the Europe 2020 ((a)a) strategy
strategy for
for
smart, sustainable and inclusive growth. The European strategy also provides for a number of quantitative benchmarks.
Quantitative benchmarks
The quantitative benchmarks are target EU averages for 2020: they are not national goals. Member States consider how and to what extent
they can contribute to the collective achievement of the European benchmarks. Accordingly, Member States can also set their own national
national
targets for 2020 ((b)b)..
Europe 2020 benchmarks for employment, education and training are:

tt BOFNQMPZNFOUSBUFPGBUMFBTUGPSUPZFBSPMET
employment
an rate of at least 75% for 20 to 64 year-olds;
tt FBSMZMFBWFSTGSPNFEVDBUJPOBOEUSBJOJOHTIPVMECFMFTTUIBO
leavers
early from education and training should be less than 10%;
tt BUMFBTUPGUPZFBSPMETTIPVMEIBWFUFSUJBSZMFWFMFEVDBUJPOBMBUUBJONFOU
least
at 40% of 30 to 34 year-olds should have tertiary-level educational attainment.
Quantitative benchmarks for education and training on the quantitative targets

set in Education and training 2020 (Council of the European Union, 2009) are:
tt BUMFBTUPGBEVMUTTIPVMEQBSUJDJQBUFJOMJGFMPOHMFBSOJOH
at 15% of adults should participate in lifelong learning ((c)c);
least
tt MPXBDIJFWJOHZFBSPMETJOSFBEJOH NBUIFNBUJDTBOETDJFODFTIPVMECFMFTTUIBO
low-achieving
15-year-olds in reading, mathematics and science should be less than 15%;
tt BUMFBTUPGDIJMESFOCFUXFFOUIFBHFPGGPVSBOETUBSUJOHDPNQVMTPSZQSJNBSZFEVDBUJPOTIPVMEQBSUJDJQBUFJOFBSMZ
least
at 95% of children between the age of four and starting compulsory primary education should partici pate in early childhood
DIJMEIPPEFEVDBUJPO
education;
tt BUMFBTUPGUPZFBSPMETTIPVMEIBWFUFSUJBSZMFWFMFEVDBUJPOBMBUUBJONFOU
least (d)
at 40% of 30 to 34 year-olds should have tertiary-level educational attainment (d);
tt FBSMZMFBWFSTGSPNFEVDBUJPOBOEUSBJOJOH F
TIPVMECFMFTTUIBO
early from education and training (e) should be less than 10%.
leavers
0UIFSRVBOUJUBUJWFCFODINBSLTBHSFFEGPS $PVODJMPGUIF&VSPQFBO6OJPO

BSF
Other quantitative benchmarks agreed for 2020 (Council of the European Union, 2011; 2012) are:
tt FNQMPZFEHSBEVBUFT UPZFBSPMET
MFBWJOHFEVDBUJPOBOEUSBJOJOHOPNPSFUIBOUISFFZFBSTCFGPSFUIF
employed
graduates (20 to 34 year-olds) leaving education and training no more than three years before the
SFGFSFODFZFBSTIPVMECFBUMFBTU
reference
year should be at least 82%(f); (f)

tt BUMFBTUPGIJHIFSFEVDBUJPOHSBEVBUFTTIPVMEIBWFBQFSJPEPGSFMBUFETUVEZPSUSBJOJOH JODMVEJOHXPSL
least
at 20% of higher education graduates should have a period of related study or training (including work
placements)
placements) (g)
abroad (g);
tt BUMFBTUPGUPZFBSPMETXJUIBOJOJUJBM7&5RVBMJmDBUJPOTIPVMEIBWFIBEBSFMBUFETUVEZPSUSBJOJOH
least
at 6% of 18 to 34 year-olds with an initial VET should have had a related study or training
(h)
period (including work placements) (h). .
Qualitative priorities
Europe 2020 and Education and training 2020 also set priority areas which Member States agreed to work on to improve. These were
TVQQMFNFOUFECZUIF#SVHFTDPNNVOJRVÏ $PVODJMPGUIF&VSPQFBO6OJPO&VSPQFBO$PNNJTTJPO
XIJDITFUPVUTIPSUUFSN
supplemented by the Bruges communiqué (Council of the European Union; European Commission; 2010), which set out 22 short-term
deliverables, or intermediate objectives, contributing to European VET policy strategic goals for 2020.
The qualitative priorities of European VET policy can be summarised as:

tt NBLJOHJOJUJBM7&5BOBUUSBDUJWFMFBSOJOHPQUJPOXJUIIJHISFMFWBODFUPMBCPVSNBSLFUOFFETBOEQBUIXBZT
making
initial VET an attractive learning option with high relevance to labour market needs and pathways to
UPIJHIFSFEVDBUJPO
highereducation;
tt FBTJMZBDDFTTJCMFDPOUJOVJOH7&5GPSQFPQMFJOEJGGFSFOUMJGFTJUVBUJPOTTJNQMJGZJOHTLJMMEFWFMPQNFOUBOEDBSFFSDIBOHFT
easily
accessible continuing VET for people in different life situations simplifying skill development and career changes;
tt XJEFOJOHBDDFTTJCJMJUZUP7&5NBLJOHJUNPSFJODMVTJWF
widening
accessibility to VET making it more inclusive;
t nFYJCMFTZTUFNTCBTFEPOSFDPHOJUJPOPGMFBSOJOHPVUDPNFT JODMVEJOHEJQMPNBT BOETVQQPSUJOHJOEJWJEVBMMFBSOJOHQBUIXBZT
systems based on recognition of learning outcomes, including diplomas, and supporting individual learning pathways;
tt TVQQPSUJOHQFSNFBCJMJUZBOENBLJOHJUFBTJFSUPNPWFCFUXFFOEJGGFSFOUQBSUTPGUIFFEVDBUJPOBOEUSBJOJOH
permeability and making it easier to move between different parts of the education and training TZTUFN system;
supporting
tt DSPTTCPSEFSNPCJMJUZBTBOJOUFHSBMQBSUPG7&5QSBDUJDF
cross-border
mobility as an integral part of VET practice;
tt TLJMMEFWFMPQNFOU
development;
skill
tt MBOHVBHFMFBSOJOH
learning ((i)i);
language
tt JNQSPWJOH7&5RVBMJUZ
improving
VET quality;
tt FODPVSBHJOHJOWFTUNFOUJO7&5
encouraging
investment in VET;
tt UFDIOPMPHJDBMJOOPWBUJPOFOUSFQSFOFVSTIJQ
innovation; entrepreneurship.
technological
tt FOUSFQSFOFVSTIJQ
entrepreneurship.
(a) See Europe 2020: a strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth.
(b) See http://ec.europa.eu/europe2020/pdf/targets_en.pdf.
(c) The percentage of the population aged 25 to 64 participating in education and training during the four weeks prior to the survey (Eurostat, labour force survey).
(d) Percentage of those aged 30 to 34 who successfully completed tertiary-level education at ISCED levels 5 and 6 (Eurostat/Unesco/OECD/Eurostat database).
(e) The share of the population aged 18 to 24 with only lower secondary education or less and no longer in education or training (Eurostat, labour force survey).
(f ) Measured as the share of the employed population aged 20 to 34 who graduated up to three years before and who are not currentl enrolled in any further
education or training activity.
(g) The period of study or training should represent a minimum of 15 European credit transfer scheme credits or last a minimum of three months.
h
( ) The period of study or training should last a minimum of two weeks, or less if documented by Europass.
(i) Work continues to develop a language learning benchmark (Council of the Ministers responsible for higher education; 2009).
On the way to 2020:
Access, attractiveness and flexibility

Core indicators in this group cover participation in investment in VET are lacking, especially for initial
initial and continuing VET by various target groups.
Participation has been chosen as the best proxy cannot be properly aggregated.
for the attractiveness of VET as a learning option. Other core indicators under this heading provide
Unfortunately, current data do not capture those insights into VET’s contribution to different types
who wish to participate in VET but are unable to, or of learning and educational attainment. The
the esteem associated with participating in initial skills covered by the core indicators are all of
VET. Indicators for initial VET consider school policy interest and relevance: studies of science,
and work-based learning (2). The core indicators technology, engineering and maths subjects,
for continuing VET cover employer-sponsored language learning and technological innovation (7).
training, both courses and on-the-job training (3). For educational attainment, the core indicators
Participation in on-the-job training provides some
2020 benchmark of the proportion of 30 to 34
arrangements. year-olds having tertiary education. This is done
Core indicators under this heading also include
the proportion of enterprises providing training.
This gives a clearer picture of opportunities and tertiary education level.
participation. In considering labour market relevance, the
Participation by adults in lifelong learning is core indicators focus on possible labour market
policy benchmark. Core indicators also consider continuing VET.

particular breakdowns of participation rates by age,
labour market status and educational attainment employment rates of 20 to 34 year-old IVET
to give an impression of how inclusive the VET graduates who are no longer in formal education (8).
Compared to more classical unemployment
learners (aged 25-64), the unemployed, people rates, employment rates are preferred, not only
with low levels of education and older workers because, from a technical perspective, they reduce
(aged 50-64) (4). problems of sample sizes, but also because
One indicator was added in this second edition they are positive measures and are used for the
to account for the share of job-related learning European Commission’s employability benchmark
carried out by adults as part of their non-formal and the Europe 2020 employment benchmark. The
education and training. Even though not expressed selection of the age group and the exclusion of
in head count terms, and even though not properly those in further education are also in line with the
accounting for the formal component, this is employability benchmark. Data for young people
intended to provide an indication of the contribution better suit the information needs related to the
of CVET to lifelong learning. policy priority on transitions from school, work-
based initial VET or other learning to work. Focus
Skill developments and labour on the young may also give earlier indications of
market relevance the impact of initial VET reform.
This group includes core indicators on VET Core indicators compare employment rates
expenditure because the level of expenditure of initial VET graduates aged 20 to 34 with two
can be related, as an input, to the importance
that governments, employers and individuals rate of general education graduates and then with
attribute to VET as a means for developing skills. the employment rate of those with low levels of
education. All the indicators exclude individuals in
to measure accurately: available data do not give further formal education. The aim is to examine any
total public, private and individual expenditure on added value of studying initial VET compared to
VET. For instance, public expenditure on initial general education or leaving school early.
VET understates the contribution of employers, Core indicators under this heading also include
particularly in countries with dual-system initial continuing VET impact on a person’s ability to
VET such as Germany. The core indicators public perform their job, providing data on the extent to
expenditure on initial VET (5) and enterprise which employees believe that continuing VET has
expenditure on continuing VET (training courses) (6) enabled them to do their job better. This indicator
Introduction 11
is preferred to one on training impact on career Improving and complementing

prospects as other factors can affect them more
than VET. The final indicator in this group looks at
core indicators
whether employees believe that they have the right
skills for their job, to derive some idea about skill It is important that work continues to improve the
mismatch among workers (9). core indicators, either by improving existing or
developing new sources of data.
Overall transitions and While acknowledging the importance of tertiary-
employment trends level initial VET, the core indicators on IVET
Core indicators in this group do not relate strictly particularly focus on medium-level education
to VET, but more broadly to education, training and (upper secondary and/or post-secondary non
the labour market. They provide information on the tertiary). The 2011 version of the international
context in which the VET system operates, which standard classification of education (ISCED
is important from a policy perspective. 2011), which provides for a distinction between
Core indicators here include other Europe 2020 professional and academic tertiary education,
benchmarks not covered elsewhere, such as early could offer the occasion for establishing a
leavers from education and training, tertiary-level conceptual, methodological and operational basis
educational attainment for 30 to 34 year-olds, and for better identification of VET at tertiary education
adult employment rates. These are complemented level.
with indicators on other policy priorities such ISCED 2011 has also given high prominence and
as the unemployment rate for the young, the visibility to orientation of education at the medium
proportion of 18 to 24 year-olds not in education level. Appropriate implementation of ISCED
training or employment, and the proportion of the 2011 in household surveys, particularly in the EU
adult population with low education levels (10). A labour force survey (LFS), will offer possibilities to
particular version of the youth unemployment rate distinguish initial VET background and make visible
has been adopted. While it is generally calculated the link between initial VET and other aspects of
and presented for those aged 15 to 24, the rate interest, such as employment, lifelong learning and
selected here focuses on 20 to 34 year-olds. careers, as well as VET’s contribution to medium-
This is to done to extend the age group, also level educational attainment. The 2009 ad hoc
considering later entrances in the labour market module of the LFS proved that this can be reliably
due to increasingly longer stay in initial education and usefully done.
and training, and to exclude the age group 15 to In absence of panel data, which could allow
19, where active labour market participation is tracking of individual trajectories, cross-sectional
relatively small (with many individuals being in variables from the adult education survey
education and training). The final indicator in this (AES) could be used to assess usefulness and
group is the projected share of total employment outcomes of adult learning based on self-reported
which will be accounted for by individuals with assessment by interviewees. Variables targeting
medium- or high-level qualifications in 2020 (11). individual satisfaction with learning activities and
the use of acquired skills, which are important
dimensions of VET quality, are also included in
the AES questionnaire, even though improvement
could be pursued.
Absence of longitudinal and more objective data
is a limitation. Better exploitation of the survey
on income and living conditions and/or of the EU
LFS waves approach could be a way forward,
especially for continuing VET. For initial VET the
possibilities are more limited as long as study
orientation (for example general or vocational) is
not fully distinguished. Even if initial orientation
is introduced into surveys, it will take time for
longitudinal data to become available.
To identify better VET’s contribution to lifelong
learning there is a need to single out VET from other
On the way to 2020:
types of learning. Developments could include Reading the country

looking at employer-sponsored training and or
job-related learning, ideally in the LFS or, more
statistical overviews
pragmatically speaking, in AES. This should be
done in terms of headcounts since the benchmark The country statistical overviews cover the EU
on lifelong learning is expressed in terms of Member States and selected EFTA and candidate
headcounts and should account for a contribution countries (12).
to the overall level of education and training, i.e. not The core indicators are presented in the same
excluding the formal component. format for each country in a statistical overview.
Improvements could be made to data on VET A chart compares the situation of the country
contribution to reducing early leaving from education with that of the EU based on the most recent
and training. These may include measuring how data available (this differs by indicator). Data in
many young people stay in education because of the chart are presented as an index where the
VET, as well as early leavers who drop out of VET EU average equals 100. If the index for a selected
streams. Further, data could usefully distinguish indicator for a country is 100, then its performance
between early leavers who never started upper equals the EU average. If the index is 90, the
secondary education and those who started but country’s performance is 90% of (or 10% below)
dropped out. These data are not collected in the the EU average. If the index is 200, the country’s
EU LFS, which is the source for the indicator on performance is twice (or 200%) the EU average. For
early leaving. The AES started collecting such some indicators, such as early school leavers from
data but improvements are needed, given current education and training, a country is performing
limitations: sample sizes, optional status of relevant better if its index is below that of the EU average.
variables, limited or optional coverage of 18 to 24 At the time of data retrieval, not all EU averages
year-old population, as well as degree of alignment were available for the new EU-28 aggregate; the
with the LFS variables for 18 to 24 year-olds not in most recent data used in this publication refer to
education or training. 2012 (with Croatia joining the EU in 2013) so this
Core indicators can be supplemented by report refers to EU values as averages across the
other readily available data. For example, the 27 countries which were Member States in 2012.
core indicator gives the forecast for the share of Such values have been retrieved from the Eurostat
total employment which will be accounted for by online database. In some cases, EU averages
were not directly available from the Eurostat online
but there are data providing breakdowns by sector, database and have been estimated as weighted
occupation and education level. Other examples of averages of available country data (Annex 1).
supplementary information include participation in In doing this, countries for which data were not
available in all years have been excluded.
and annual expenditure on educational institutions. Data on which the index scores are calculated
Updates of the data and core indicators are are presented in a country table, which also shows
planned for the future. changes over time. Comments are provided to help
read the data and highlight key points. In addition to
country data, comments also refer to EU averages
and, in some instances, to EU benchmarks (targets
set for the EU averages and to be met by 2020),
as well as to 2020 national targets. This is done
to contextualise country data and to offer a basis
for comparisons. There is no intention to identify
EU averages or EU benchmarks as concrete target
values for the countries. Even national targets,
which could be more naturally interpreted in this
sense, should be read with caution because they
are objectives to be met by 2020 and not at the
indicator is in Annex 1, which also includes the

years used to calculate each indicator.
Introduction 13
To provide some idea of trends, data from the Where the break in series occurs in 2011 or
baseline year of 2010 are compared in the table 2012, data for 2006 and 2010 are not presented. If
with data from 2006. For both 2006 and 2010, the break in series occurs between 2006 and
country data are shown alongside the EU 2010, neither data for 2006 nor the change over
average. In the next column, trend data over the period 2006-10 are shown. A new type of flag
2006-10 (in most cases expressed as percentage has been introduced in Eurostat database,
point increase or decrease) are shown for both the indicating a change in definition. Data where there
country and the EU. Where more recent data are is a change in definition are treated in a similar way
available (either for 2011 or for 2012, depending to breaks in series. When the change in definition
on the indicator), they are provided. Not all data or is in 2006 or 2010, these data are not presented
indicators are updated annually: some are because comparability over time is also affected.
provided from periodic surveys. In some cases
comparisons are not possible owing to changes in
data series.
(1) The European and international statistical infrastructure is the combined data collections, surveys and related data production processes carried out at European
and international levels to provide statistical information on VET and/or lifelong learning.
(2) The primary source of these data is the annual UOE data collection. Alternative sources, the continuing vocational training survey (CVTS) and the labour cost
survey, which also provide on apprenticeships, were considered, but these data are less frequent. CVTS3 data on initial VET were not regarded as of
quality for a core indicator.
(3) Although these are not the only forms of employer-provided training, they are the most important according to participation levels, as derived from the third
continuing vocational training survey, which is the main data source.
(4) All indicators on lifelong learning come from the European labour force survey.
(5) Data come from the UOE data collection on education systems.
(6) Data come from the continuing vocational training survey.
( 7) Data on of study come from the UOE data collection and data on the technological innovation come from the community innovation survey.
(8) Data come from the 2009 ad hoc module of the EU labour force survey, which for the time in the EU context distinguished the orientation (general or
vocational) of the highest level of education attained.
9
( ) Data are selected from the 2010 European working condition survey.
(10) All these indicators come from the European labour force survey.
(11) Data from Cedefop’s skills forecast.
(12) The selection of the candidate and EFTA countries is driven by data availability. Countries were excluded when available data were scarce for drawing a
reasonably complete statistical overview. Of the countries whose ministers signed the Bruges communiqué, only Liechtenstein is not covered.
Part I
Member States of
the European Union
1. Belgium
VET indicators for Belgium for the most recent year available
Index numbers (EU=100)
NB: The index numbers are derived from data summarised in the table but which have not been rounded.
All data in the table have been rounded.
On the way to 2020:
Belgium’s performance on a range of indicators training to support innovation (60.0% of innovative

selected to monitor progress in VET and lifelong enterprises) is also significantly higher than the EU
learning across the European Union (EU) is average (41.5%) (CIS data for 2010).
summarised below. The chart compares the Based on 2009 data, the employment rate for
situation in Belgium with that of the EU based IVET graduates (aged 20-34) at ISCED 3-4 (85.0%)
on the most recent data available (this differs by is higher than the EU average (79.1%). Whether
indicator.) Data in the chart are presented as an these graduates are more or less likely to be
index where the EU average equals 100. If the index employed than other young people in the same age
for a selected indicator for Belgium is 100, then its group is also of interest: data here compare them
performance equals the EU average. If the index with graduates from general education at same
is 90, its performance is 90% of (or 10% below) ISCED level and graduates at lower ISCED level
the EU average. If the index is 200, Belgium’s (2 or below). A positive figure indicates that IVET
performance is twice (or 200%) the EU average. graduates are more likely to be in employment and
For some indicators, such as early leavers from a negative figure that they are less likely to be so.
education and training, a country is performing IVET graduates in Belgium enjoy a positive
better if its score is below that of the EU average. premium on both measures. They have an
Data on which the index is calculated are employment rate 11.2 percentage points higher
presented in the table, which also shows changes than their counterparts from general education
over time. A technical definition of each indicator is (above the EU average premium of 5.6 percentage
provided in Annex 1 which also includes the years points) and 26.9 percentage points higher than
used to calculate each indicator. those with lower-level qualifications (also above the
EU average premium of 17.4 percentage points).
Key points All these employment figures relate to 2009 and
exclude the young in further education.
The percentage of all upper secondary students Overall transitions and employment trends
participating in IVET in Belgium (72.8%) is higher In this section all data refer to 2012 unless otherwise
than the corresponding EU average (50.3% in 2011). stated.
Only 4.3% of upper secondary IVET students are The share of early leavers from education and
in combined work- and school-based programmes training (12.0%) is slightly lower than the EU average
compared with 27.0% for the EU as a whole. Data (12.8%). However, this percentage has stabilised
for 2012 reveal that Belgium has proportionally since 2010 and remains above the national target
fewer people involved in lifelong learning (6.6%) (9.5%) and the average target set by the Europe
than the EU as a whole (9.0%): this share has 2020 strategy (10%).
decreased compared to 2010 (from 7.2% to 6.6%). The percentage of the 30 to 34 year-olds with
Participation in employer-sponsored CVT courses tertiary-level education is 43.9%; the EU figure is
(2010 CVTS data) is higher (52% of all employees 35.8%. Belgium is above the Europe 2020 average
in all enterprises surveyed) than in the EU (38%). target (40%), but has not yet surpassed the national
The share of enterprises providing training is also target (47%).
higher (78% for Belgium, 66% for the EU as a The percentage of adults with low-level education
whole). is higher than in the EU (respectively 28.4% and
25.8%). The unemployment rate for 20 to 34 year-
Skill development and labour market relevance olds (11.5%) and NEET rate (15.0%) are lower than
The main differences between Belgium and the EU for the EU as a whole (14.5 for the unemployment
in skill development and labour market relevance rate and 17.0 for the NEET rate).
are set out below.
Students in IVET are less likely to graduate
in STEM subjects (in 2011 19.1% of IVET upper
secondary graduations are in STEM subjects
compared with 29.4% in the EU). In contrast,
the percentage of 30 to 34 year-olds who have
attained tertiary-level VET (ISCED 5b) is relatively
high (19.8%, compared with 8.6% in the EU in
2012). The percentage of enterprises providing
Belgium 19
Score on VET indicators in Belgium and in the EU, 2006, 2010

and 2011/12 (where available)
NB: b = break in series. Where the break in series occurs in 2011/12, data for 2006 and 2010 are not presented.
If the break in series occurs between 2006 and 2010, neither data for 2006 nor the change in 2006-10 are shown;
d= change in definition. Data are treated in a similar way to breaks in series. When the change in definition is in 2006
or 2010, these data are also not presented because comparability over time is affected; u = unreliable; p= provisional.
2. Bulgaria
VET indicators for Bulgaria for the most recent year available
Bulgaria 21
Bulgaria’s performance on a range of indicators VET with STEM qualifications is higher (43.7%)
selected to monitor progress in VET and lifelong than the EU average (29.4%), although this has
learning across the European Union (EU) is decreased since 2010 in contrast to the recent
summarised below. The chart compares the trend across the EU. The percentage of 30 to 34
situation in Bulgaria with that of the EU based year-olds who have attained tertiary-level VET
on the most recent data available (this differs by (ISCED 5b) is 1.6%, considerably lower than the
indicator). Data in the chart are presented as an EU average of 8.6%. The percentage of enterprises
index where the EU average equals 100. If the index providing training to support innovation is below
for a selected indicator for Bulgaria is 100, then its the EU average (34.0% of innovative enterprises in
performance equals the EU average. If the index Bulgaria; 41.5% in the EU in 2010). The percentage
is 90, its performance is 90% of (or 10% below) of workers with skills matched to their duties is
the EU average. If the index is 200, Bulgaria’s relatively high at 64.3% compared with 55.3%
performance is twice (or 200%) the EU average. across the EU in 2010.
For some indicators, such as early leavers from Based on 2009 data, the employment rate for
education and training, a country is performing IVET graduates (aged 20-34) at ISCED 3-4 (80.9%)
better if its score is below that of the EU average. is slightly higher than the EU average (79.1%).
Data on which the index is calculated are Whether these graduates are more or less likely to
presented in the table, which also shows changes be employed than other young people in the same
over time. A technical definition of each indicator is age group is also of interest. Data here compare
provided in Annex 1 which also includes the years them with graduates from general education at
used to calculate each indicator. same ISCED level and graduates at lower ISCED
level (2 or below). A positive figure indicates that
Key points IVET graduates are more likely to be in employment
and a negative figure that they are less likely to be
Access, attractiveness and flexibility so.
The chart illustrates the differences in IVET and IVET graduates in Bulgaria, enjoy a positive
CVET participation between Bulgaria and the premium on both measures. They have an
EU as a whole. Upper-secondary-level students employment rate 7.9 percentage points higher
in Bulgaria are slightly more likely to participate than their counterparts from general education
in IVET than those in the EU generally: 52.2% of (above the corresponding EU average premium of
upper secondary students were enrolled in IVET 5.6 percentage points) and 25.1 percentage points
compared with 50.3% in the EU (data for 2011). A higher than those with lower-level qualifications
more remarkable difference is found in the adult (also above the EU average premium of 17.4
participation rate in lifelong learning, 1.5%, which percentage points). All these employment figures
is much lower than the EU average of 9.0% in 2012. relate to 2009 and exclude the young in further
Since 2006, the percentage of adults participating education.
in lifelong learning has increased little in Bulgaria
and remains much below the average target (15%) Overall transitions and employment trends
set by the strategic framework ‘education and In this section all data refer to 2012 unless otherwise
training 2020’. Data from the 2010 CVTS give an stated.
indication of the limited extent to which employers Early leaving from education and training is
provide training to their employees: 31% compared approximately in line with the EU average (12.5%
with the EU average 66%. Consistent with this and 12.8% respectively). Although early leaving
finding, the survey reports that relatively few has fallen over recent years (with a further drop
employees undertake CVT courses (22% in from 2010 to 2012 by more than one percentage
Bulgaria, 38% across the EU). Participation by point), it remains above the Europe 2020 average
young IVET graduates in further education and target of 10% and the national target of 11%.
training (24.3%) is also lower than in the EU (30.7% The percentage of 30 to 34 year-olds who
in 2009). have attained tertiary-level education (26.9%)
is relatively low compared with the EU average
Skill development and labour market relevance (35.8%). At 26.9% this indicator remains below the
Data from 2010 on public expenditure on IVET national target (36%) and below the Europe 2020
(ISCED 3-4) per student show that this was average target (40%). The percentage of adults
significantly lower than the average of the EU (EUR with low educational attainment (19.0%) is below
3 048 in Bulgaria and an average of EUR 8 549 in the average found across the EU (25.8%). The
the EU), but expenditure as a percentage of GDP is NEET rate for 18 to 24 year-olds is much higher
closer to the EU average (0.56% in Bulgaria, 0.71% at 26.0% than the EU average of 17.0%, and the
in the EU). unemployment rate for 20 to 34 year-olds is higher
The percentage graduating from upper secondary compared to the EU average (at 16.1% and 14.5%
respectively).
On the way to 2020:
Score on VET indicators in Bulgaria and in the EU, 2006, 2010

3. The Czech Republic
VET indicators for the Czech Republic for the most recent year available
On the way to 2020:
The Czech Republic’s performance on a range higher than the EU average (0.71%). However, the
of indicators selected to monitor progress in VET amount spent per student, EUR 5 164, is below
and lifelong learning across the European Union the EU average, EUR 8 549. The share of STEM
(EU) is summarised below. The chart compares graduates from upper secondary VET is higher than
the situation in the Czech Republic with that of the the EU average (36.3% and 29.4% respectively).
EU based on the most recent data available (this Based on 2009 data, the employment rate for
differs by indicator). Data in the chart are presented IVET graduates (aged 20-34) at ISCED 3-4 (78.7%)
as an index where the EU average equals 100. If is approximately in line with the EU average (79.1%).
the index for a selected indicator for the Czech It could be further compared with the employment
Republic is 100, then its performance equals the rate for graduates from general education at same
EU average. If the index is 90, its performance is ISCED level and that of graduates at lower ISCED
90% of (or 10% below) the EU average. If the index level (2 or below). A positive figure indicates that
is 200, the Czech Republic’s performance is twice IVET graduates are more likely to be in employment
(or 200%) the EU average. For some indicators, and a negative figure that they are less likely to be
such as early leavers from education and training, so. Czech Republic IVET graduates enjoy a positive
a country is performing better if its score is below premium on both measures. Their employment
that of the EU average. rate is 10.6 percentage points higher than that of
Data on which the index is calculated are their counterparts from general education (this is
presented in the table, which also shows changes above the corresponding EU average premium
over time. A technical definition of each indicator is of 5.6 percentage points) and 35.2 percentage
provided in Annex 1 which also includes the years points higher than that of those with lower-level
used to calculate each indicator. qualifications (also above the corresponding EU
average premium of 17.4 percentage points). All
Key points these employment figures relate to 2009 and
The chart illustrates frequent participation in Overall transitions and employment trends
IVET: the percentage of all upper secondary In this section all data refer to 2012 unless otherwise
students participating in IVET is 73.0%, much stated.
higher than the EU average of 50.3%. The share There has been a slight increase in the
of IVET students involved in combined work- and percentage of early leavers in the Czech Republic
school-based programmes (43.6%) is also higher from 2010 (4.9%) to 2012 (5.5%). This is still well
than the EU average (27.0%). New methodology below the EU average (12.8%) and the Europe 2020
has been introduced from 2011 for data on adult average target (10%) and equal to the national
participation in lifelong learning; this has partly target (5.5%). The unemployment rate for 20 to
modified the traditional picture for the country. 34 year-olds at 9.5% is below the EU average of
Overall adult participation in education and training 14.5%. Fewer adults have low-level education than
and participation of older adults in 2012 are above in the EU (7.5% compared with 25.8%). The share
the EU average. This is also more consistent with of 30 to 34 year-olds with tertiary-level education
other evidence. Enterprise provision of training and has increased significantly from 13.1% in 2006 to
employee participation in CVT courses – derived 20.4% in 2010 and 25.6% in 2012, but is still below
from 2010 CVTS data – are both higher in the Czech the EU average (35.8%), the Europe 2020 average
Republic than the EU average. For example, 61% of target (40%) and the national target (32%).
employees participated in CVT courses compared
to 38% in the EU, and 72% of employers report
providing training compared with the EU 42%.
Similar differences can be found for participation
in on-the-job training (31% for the Czech Republic;
21% for the EU as a whole).
Skill development and labour market relevance
The Czech Republic has high values in several
indicators in this group.
Public expenditure on IVET (based on 2010 data
for ISCED 3-4) as a percentage of GDP (0.80%), is
the Czech Republic 25
Score on VET indicators in the Czech Republic and in the EU, 2006, 2010
4. Denmark
VET indicators for Denmark for the most recent year available
Debmark 27
Denmark’s performance on a range of indicators and 29.4% in the EU, data for 2011).
selected to monitor progress in VET and lifelong Based on 2009 data, the employment rate for
learning across the European Union (EU) is IVET graduates (aged 20-34) at ISCED 3-4 (85.5%)
summarised below. The chart compares the is higher than the EU average (79.1%). Data
situation in Denmark with that of the EU based presented here also compare this employment
on the most recent data available (this differs by rate with that for graduates from general education
indicator). Data in the chart are presented as an at the same ISCED level and graduates at lower
index where the EU average equals 100. If the index ISCED level (2 or below). A positive figure indicates
for a selected indicator for Denmark is 100, then its that IVET graduates are more likely to be in
performance equals the EU average. If the index employment and a negative figure that they are
is 90, its performance is 90% of (or 10% below) less likely to be so: IVET graduates in Denmark
the EU average. If the index is 200, Denmark’s enjoy a positive premium on both measures.
performance is twice (or 200%) the EU average. Their employment rate is 6.0 percentage points
For some indicators, such as early leavers from higher than for graduates from general education
education and training, a country is performing (approximately in line with the EU average premium
better if its score is below that of the EU average. of 5.6 percentage points). The rate is also 14.6
Data on which the index is calculated are percentage points higher than for graduates with
presented in the table, which also shows changes lower-level qualifications (though this is below the
over time. A technical definition of each indicator is EU average premium of 17.4 percentage points).
provided in Annex 1 which also includes the years All these employment figures relate to 2009 and
used to calculate each indicator. exclude the young in further education.
Key points Overall transitions and employment trends

In this section all data refer to 2012 unless otherwise
Access, attractiveness and flexibility stated.
The percentage of upper secondary students in The early leaver rate from education and training,
the IVET stream (46.1%) is slightly lower than the 9.1%, is lower than the EU average of 12.8%. This
EU average (50.3%), though nearly all students in value is below both the average target set by the
IVET are engaged in combined work- and school- Europe 2020 strategy and its national target of
based programmes (96.8% compared with 27.0% 10%. The percentage of 30 to 34 year-olds with
in the EU). tertiary-level education (43.0%) is higher than
Data for 2012 show that adult participation the EU average (35.8%). At this level, Denmark
in lifelong learning is more than three times the passes the Europe 2020 average target and the
EU average (31.6% compared to 9.0% in 2012), national target, both of which are set at 40%. The
and twice the average target (15%) set by the percentage of adults with low-level education
strategic framework ‘education and training 2020’. in Denmark is lower than the EU average (22.1%
Older adults, adults with low-level education, compared with 25.8%).
and unemployed adults, are all much more The employment rate for 20 to 64 year-olds
likely to participate in lifelong learning than their (75.4%) is higher than the EU average (68.5%). The
counterparts across the EU, although there has unemployment rate for 20 to 34 year-olds is 10.4%,
been a slight reduction in participation rates lower than the EU average (14.5%). The NEET rate is
recorded by these groups from 2010 to 2012, while, approximately half that in the EU (8.8% compared
over the same period, EU averages have remained with 17.0%).
stable. The percentage of adults who wanted
to train, but did not, is relatively high (14.8% in
Denmark compared to 10.9% for the EU as a
whole).

The average number of foreign languages learned
by students in upper secondary IVET is slightly
below the EU average (0.9 in Denmark and 1.2
in the EU, data for 2010), as is the share of IVET
graduations in STEM subjects (19.7% in Denmark
On the way to 2020:
Score on VET indicators in Denmark and in the EU, 2006, 2010

5. Germany
VET indicators for Germany for the most recent year available
On the way to 2020:
Germany’s performance on a range of indicators % of GDP was slightly lower in Germany (0.61%)
selected to monitor progress in VET and lifelong than in the EU generally (0.71%). Expenditure per
learning across the European Union (EU) is student was also lower (EUR 7 847 compared
summarised below. The chart compares the with EUR 8 549). German upper secondary IVET
situation in Germany with that of the EU based students learn 0.4 foreign languages, on average,
on the most recent data available (this differs by while the EU average is 1.2 languages (in 2011).
indicator). Data in the chart are presented as an Based on 2009 data, the employment rate for
index where the EU average equals 100. If the index IVET graduates (aged 20-34) at ISCED 3-4 (83.9%)
for a selected indicator for Germany is 100, then its is above the EU average (79.1%). Whether these
performance equals the EU average. If the index graduates are more or less likely to be employed
is 90, its performance is 90% of (or 10% below) than other young people in the same age group
the EU average. If the index is 200, Germany’s is also of interest. Data presented here compare
performance is twice (or 200%) the EU average. them with graduates from general education at the
For some indicators, such as early leavers from same ISCED level and graduates at lower ISCED
education and training, a country is performing level (2 or below). A positive figure indicates that
better if its score is below that of the EU average. IVET graduates are more likely to be in employment
Data on which the index is calculated are and a negative figure that they are less likely to be
presented in the table, which also shows changes so. In Germany, IVET graduates enjoy a positive
over time. A technical definition of each indicator is employment premium on both measures: an
provided in Annex 1 which also includes the years employment rate 26.2 percentage points higher
used to calculate each indicator. than their counterparts from general education
(well above the corresponding EU average premium
Key points of 5.6 percentage points) and 29.7 percentage
points higher than that for graduates with lower-
Access, attractiveness and flexibility level qualifications (also above the corresponding
2011 data show that students in initial vocational EU average premium of 17.4 percentage points).
education and training account for 48.6% of all All these employment figures relate to 2009 and
upper secondary students. This is close to the exclude the young in further education.
EU average of 50.3%. However, the percentage
of IVET students enrolled in combined work- and Overall transitions and employment trends
school-based programmes is higher in Germany In this section all data refer to 2012 unless otherwise
(88.2%) than in the EU as a whole (27.0%). In stated.
2009 the percentage of young VET graduates In Germany the share of early leavers from
participating in further education and training was education and training is 10.5% while the EU
lower in Germany (16.4%) than in the EU on average average rate is 12.8%.
(30.7%). The percentage of adults engaged in The employment rate for 20 to 64 year-olds,
lifelong learning (7.9%) is slightly lower than the EU 76.7%, is higher than the EU average (68.5%). The
average (9.0% in 2012), and is below the average unemployment rate for the 20 to 34 year-olds is
target (15%) set by the strategic framework lower in Germany than in the EU (6.5% compared
‘education and training 2020’. The percentage with 14.5%). So is the NEET rate for 18 to 24 year-
of older people, the unemployed, and those with olds (9.8% in Germany; 17.0% in the EU) which,
relatively low qualifications participating in lifelong from 2006 to 2012, has been falling in Germany but
learning are all lower in Germany than for the EU rising across the EU. A relatively low share of adults
as a whole. has only low-level education (13.7% versus 25.8%
2010 CVTS data reveal that enterprises are more in the EU). At 31.9% the share of 30 to 34 year-
likely to provide training than in the EU as a whole olds who have attained tertiary-level education is
(73% versus 66%), and that employees are more lower than the EU average of 35.8% and lower than
likely to participate in on-the-job training (28% the Europe 2020 average target of 40% and the
versus 21%). national target of 42%.

Some differences between Germany and the EU
average can be noted in this group of indicators.
In 2010, public expenditure on IVET (ISCED 3-4) as
Germany 31
Score on VET indicators in Germany and in the EU, 2006, 2010

6. Estonia
VET indicators for Estonia for the most recent year available
Estonia 33
Estonia’s performance on a range of indicators is lower than the EU average (79.1%). Whether these
selected to monitor progress in VET and lifelong graduates are more or less likely to be employed
learning across the European Union (EU) is than other young people in the same age group
summarised below. The chart compares the is also of interest. Data presented here compare
situation in Estonia with that of the EU based them with graduates from general education at the
on the most recent data available (this differs by same ISCED level and graduates at lower ISCED
indicator). Data in the chart are presented as an level (2 or below). A positive figure indicates that
index where the EU average equals 100. If the IVET graduates are more likely to be in employment
index for a selected indicator for Estonia is 100, and a negative figure that they are less likely to
then its performance equals the EU average. If be so. In Estonia, the employment rate of IVET
the index is 90, its performance is 90% of (or 10% graduates is 3.5 percentage points lower than that
below) the EU average. If the index is 200, Estonia’s for graduates from general education (the opposite
performance is twice (or 200%) the EU average. occurs in most EU Member States). It is higher than
For some indicators, such as early leavers from that for graduates with lower-level qualifications:
education and training, a country is performing compared to the latter, they enjoy a considerable
better if its score is below that of the EU average. employment premium of 13.7 percentage points,
Data on which the index is calculated are though lower than the corresponding EU average
presented in the table, which also shows changes premium of 17.4 points. These figures should be
over time. A technical definition of each indicator is interpreted with some caution due to sample size
provided in Annex 1 which also includes the years issues. All these employment figures relate to 2009
used to calculate each indicator. and exclude the young in further education.
Key points Overall transitions and employment trends

In this section all data refer to 2012 (unless otherwise
Access, attractiveness and flexibility stated) where there are mixed results. Levels of
Compared to the EU average (50.3% in 2011), early leaving from education and training in Estonia
IVET students in Estonia comprise a lower share are below the EU average (10.5% of 18 to 24 year-
of the student population at upper secondary level olds in Estonia, 12.8% in the EU as whole). Estonia
(34.4%). Only a small proportion of these IVET is moving closer to the Europe 2020 average target
students are in combined work- and school-based of 10% and the national target of 9.5%. The share
programmes (0.8% compared to 27.0% in the EU of 30 to 34 year-olds with tertiary-level education
in 2011). Adult participation in lifelong learning is higher than in the EU (39.1% compared with
(12.9%), in contrast, is above the EU average 35.8%). The data indicate that Estonia is slightly
(9.0%) in 2012. This rate has increased markedly below the Europe 2020 average target (40%) and
since 2006, but is below the average target (15%) the national target (also 40%).
set by the strategic framework ‘education and Estonia has a relatively small percentage of adults
training 2020’. with lower-level educational attainment (10.2%
Data from the 2010 CVTS show that 68% of compared with the EU average of 25.8%). The
enterprises provided training compared with NEET rate is slightly lower than the EU on average
66% in the EU, but participation of employees in (15.3% versus 17.0 as is the unemployment rate
CVT courses was slightly less favourable (31% in for 20 to 34 year-olds (13.1% versus 14.5%). Both
Estonia, 38% in the EU). indicators have decreased between 2010 and 2012
in Estonia while they have increased across the EU
Skill development and labour market relevance as a whole. The employment rate for 20 to 64 year-
In 2012, 12.4% of 30 to 34 year-olds attained olds decreased between 2006 and 2010, though it
tertiary-level VET (ISCED 5b) compared with the has since increased to 72.1% compared to 68.5%
EU average of 8.6%. Between 2006 and 2012, in the EU.
the rate of growth recorded by this indicator was
greater than in the EU.
The percentage of STEM graduates from upper
secondary VET at 45.6% is higher than the EU
average of 29.4% (in 2011).
Based on 2009 data, the employment rate for
IVET graduates (aged 20-34) at ISCED 3-4 (67.3%)
On the way to 2020:
Score on VET indicators in Estonia and in the EU, 2006, 2010

7. Ireland
VET indicators for Ireland for the most recent year available
On the way to 2020:
Ireland’s performance on a range of indicators also of interest. Data presented here compare them
selected to monitor progress in VET and lifelong with graduates from general education at the same
learning across the European Union (EU) is ISCED level and graduates at lower ISCED level
summarised below. The chart compares the (2 or below). A positive figure indicates that IVET
situation in Ireland with that of the EU based on graduates are more likely to be in employment and
the most recent data available (this differs by a negative figure that they are less likely to be so:
indicator). Data in the chart are presented as an IVET graduates in Ireland enjoy a positive premium
index where the EU average equals 100. If the on both measures. The employment rate of IVET
index for a selected indicator for Ireland is 100, graduates is 1.8 percentage points higher than
then its performance equals the EU average. If that of their counterparts from general education
the index is 90, its performance is 90% of (or 10% (a positive employment premium, even though
below) the EU average. If the index is 200, Ireland’s it is lower than the EU average premium of 5.6
performance is twice (or 200%) the EU average. percentage points); the employment rate of IVET
For some indicators, such as early leavers from graduates is also 20.9 percentage points higher
education and training, a country is performing than that of those with lower-level qualifications
better if its score is below that of the EU average. (this premium is both positive and above the EU
Data on which the index is calculated are average of 17.4 percentage points). All employment
presented in the table, which also shows changes figures relate to 2009 and exclude the young in
over time. A technical definition of each indicator is further education.
provided in Annex 1 which also includes the years
used to calculate each indicator. Overall transitions and employment trends
Key points stated.
In Ireland, the NEET rate for 18 to 24 year-olds
Access, attractiveness and flexibility and the unemployment rate for 20 to 34 year-olds
Ireland reports relatively low levels of participation are higher (23.8% and 18.4%, respectively) than
in both IVET and adult learning compared to EU averages (17.0% and 14.5%). The employment
the EU, with data for 2011 showing the share of rate for the 20 to 64 year-olds is 63.7% in Ireland
upper secondary students enrolled in vocational and 68.5% across the EU.
programmes as lower in Ireland (34.0%) than the The share of 30 to 34 year-olds with tertiary-level
EU average (50.3%). education is higher than the EU average (51.5%
The percentage of adults participating in lifelong versus 35.8%) and the share of early leavers
learning in 2012 in Ireland (7.1%) is lower than the from education and training is lower (9.7% versus
EU average (9.0%) and below the average target 12.8%).
(15%) set by the strategic framework ‘education
and training 2020’. Participation rates in lifelong
learning for older adults, adults with low-level
qualifications, and unemployed adults are also
lower than in the EU. The percentage of young VET
graduates who undertake further education and
training (16.3%) is also markedly lower than the EU
average (30.7% in 2009).

The share of 30 to 34 year-olds who have attained
a tertiary level of VET (ISCED 5b) is higher (17.7%)
than the EU average (8.6% in 2012), showing that
VET plays an important role in determining the high
level of tertiary attainment for 30 to 34 year-olds.
Based on 2009 data, the employment rate of
is lower than the EU average (79.1%). Whether these
graduates are more or less likely to be employed
than other young people in the same age group is
Ireland 37
Score on VET indicators in Ireland and in the EU, 2006, 2010

8. Greece
VET indicators for Greece for the most recent year available
Greece 39
Greece’s performance on a range of indicators Greece compared to the EU varies. The average
selected to monitor progress in VET and lifelong number of foreign languages learned in upper
learning across the European Union (EU) is secondary IVET is lower in Greece (0.7) than in the
summarised below. The chart compares the EU (1.2). A slightly higher percentage (10.6%) of
situation in Greece with that of the EU based on 30 to 34 year-olds has attained tertiary-level VET
the most recent data available (this differs by (ISCED 5b) than in the EU (8.6% in 2012).
indicator). Data in the chart are presented as an Based on 2009 data, the employment rate of
index where the EU average equals 100. If the 20 to 34 year-old IVET graduates at medium level
index for a selected indicator for Greece is 100, of education (ISCED 3-4) differs little from the EU
then its performance equals the EU average. If average (78.7% in Greece and 79.1% in the EU).
the index is 90, its performance is 90% of (or 10% Whether these graduates are more or less likely
below) the EU average. If the index is 200, Greece’s to be employed than other young people in the
performance is twice (or 200%) the EU average. same age group is also of interest. Data presented
For some indicators, such as early leavers from here compare them with graduates from general
education and training, a country is performing education at same ISCED level and graduates at
better if its score is below that of the EU average. lower ISCED level (2 or below). A positive figure
Data on which the index is calculated are indicates that IVET graduates are more likely to be
presented in the table, which also shows changes in employment and a negative figure that they are
over time. A technical definition of each indicator is less likely to be so.
provided in Annex 1 which also includes the years IVET graduates in Greece enjoy a positive
used to calculate each indicator. premium on both measures. Their employment
rate is 4.6 percentage points higher than that of
Key points their counterparts from general education (this
is a positive employment premium, even though
Access, attractiveness and flexibility it is lower than the EU average of 5.6 percentage
The chart illustrates that Greece has relatively points); the employment rate of IVET graduates
low figures compared with the EU average on is also 5.9 percentage points higher than those
many indicators in this group. The share of upper with lower-level qualifications (also a positive
secondary students enrolled in IVET is low (31.7% employment premium, though much lower than
compared to 50.3% for the EU). For female the EU average of 17.4 percentage points). All these
enrolment, this difference is even more apparent: employment figures relate to 2009 and exclude the
24.3% of females in upper secondary education young in further education.
are enrolled in IVET compared to 44.7% in the
EU in 2011. The percentage of adults involved in Overall transitions and employment trends
lifelong learning in 2012 is also lower (2.9%) than In this section all data refer to 2012 unless otherwise
the EU average (9.0%). This figure is far below the stated.
average target (15%) set by the strategic framework The NEET rate in Greece (28.4%) and the
‘education and training 2020’. Participation in unemployment rate for 20 to 34 year-olds in
lifelong learning by adults with low-level education, the country (35.8%) are much higher than the
unemployed adults and older adults is lower in corresponding EU averages (17.0% and 14.5%,
Greece than the EU. respectively). The employment rate for 20 to 64
Based on 2005 CVTS data, employee year-olds is lower (55.3%) than in the EU as a
participation in CVT courses and on-the-job whole (68.5%).
training suggest that employer-sponsored training The share of 30 to 34 year-olds who have attained
is less frequent than in the EU generally. The a tertiary-level education (30.9%) is less than the
percentage of young VET graduates participating EU average (35.8%). At this level, it is below the
in further education and training is lower than the Europe 2020 average target (40%) and the national
EU average (16.6% in Greece and 30.7% for the EU target (32%). The share of adults with lower level of
in 2009). The proportion of individuals who wanted education is also markedly higher (34.3%) than in
to train but did not (19.4%) is higher than the EU the EU (25.8%).
average (10.9%) (based on 2011 data). The early leaver rate from training and education
is lower than the EU average (11.4% compared to
Skill development and labour market relevance 12.8% ). At this level, it is above the Europe 2020
Data are missing for several indicators of this average target (10%) and the national target (9.7%).
group; where data are available, the situation in
On the way to 2020:
Score on VET indicators in Greece and in the EU, 2006, 2010

9. Spain
VET indicators for Spain for the most recent year available
On the way to 2020:
Spain’s performance on a range of indicators selected Skill development and labour market relevance
to monitor progress in VET and lifelong learning In Spain 13.3% of 30 to 34 year-olds have attained
across the European Union (EU) is summarised tertiary-level VET (ISCED 5b), which is high
below. The chart compares the situation in Spain compared with 8.6% in the EU (data for 2012),
with that of the EU based on the most recent data showing that VET contributes significantly to
available (this differs by indicator). Data in the chart attainment of tertiary-level education among the
are presented as an index where the EU average young. In contrast, training to support innovation
equals 100. If the index for a selected indicator for is provided by 23.5% of enterprises, which is
Spain is 100, then its performance equals the EU lower than the EU average of 41.5% (data for
average. If the index is 90, its performance is 90% 2010). Compared with the situation in 2008 (10.4%
of (or 10% below) the EU average. If the index is versus 42.8%) Spain would appear to be catching
200, Spain’s performance is twice (or 200%) the EU up with the EU average. Based on 2009 data, the
average. For some indicators, such as early leavers employment rate of IVET graduates (aged 20-34)
from education and training, a country is performing at ISCED 3-4 (72.2%) is lower than the EU average
better if its score is below that of the EU average. (79.1%). Data presented here compare these IVET
Data on which the index is calculated are graduates to graduates from general education at
presented in the table, which also shows changes the same ISCED level and graduates at lower ISCED
over time. A technical definition of each indicator is level (2 or below). A positive figure indicates that
provided in Annex 1 which also includes the years IVET graduates are more likely to be in employment
used to calculate each indicator. and a negative figure that they are less likely to
be so. In Spain, IVET graduates enjoy a positive
Key points premium on both measures. Their employment rate
is 3.3 percentage points higher than that of their
Access, attractiveness and flexibility counterparts from general education (even though
The chart and the table show that Spain has levels this is lower than the EU average premium of 5.6
of participation in IVET and CVET which are close to percentage points); their employment rate is 10.4
the respective averages for the EU. The proportion percentage points higher than for graduates with
of students in upper secondary education lower-level qualifications (again a positive premium
participating in IVET in 2011 (45.3%) is slightly but lower than the EU average premium of 17.4
below the EU average (50.3%). Only a small share percentage points). All these employment figures
of IVET students are involved in combined work- relate to 2009 and exclude the young in further
and school-based training (4.3% compared with education.
the EU average of 27.0%). Spain has proportionally
more adults involved in lifelong learning than the Overall transitions and employment trends
EU as a whole (respectively 10.7% and 9.0%; data In this section all data refer to 2012 unless otherwise
for 2012). This figure has been stable since 2006 stated.
(10.4%) and is below the average target (15%) set The share of early leavers from education and
by the strategic framework ‘education and training training is significantly higher than the EU average
2020’. The proportions of older adults, unemployed (24.9% compared with 12.8%). Although this score
adults, and adults with relatively low qualifications has fallen (30.5% in 2006 and 28.4% in 2010), it is
participating in lifelong learning are all higher than still much higher than both the Europe 2020 average
the corresponding EU averages. Employer provision target (10%) and the national target (15%). The
of training, using 2010 CVTS data, is higher: 75% employment rate for 20 to 64 year-olds (59.3%) is
in Spain compared with 66% across the EU. The lower than the EU (68.5%) and has been decreasing
proportion of employees receiving employer- far faster in Spain than in the EU as a whole. The
sponsored CVT courses (48%) is also higher than unemployment rate of 20 to 34 year-olds has
the EU average (38%). Both these indicators have increased significantly from 14.9% in 2010 to 32.4%
increased substantially in Spain since the 2005 in 2012 and is significantly higher than across the
CVTS was conducted. Over the period 2007-11 the EU (14.5%). The percentage of adults with low-level
percentage of job-related education and training, educational attainment (45.6%) is higher than the EU
among all non-formal education and training, has average (25.8%). More favourably, the percentage
also increased (from 73.1% to 84.1%), while it has of 30 to 34 year-olds with tertiary-level educational
slightly decreased for the EU as whole (from 84.5% attainment at 40.1% is higher than the EU average
to 81.4%). of 35.8, so Spain is above the Europe 2020 average
target (40%) and is close to its national target (44%).
Spain 43
Score on VET indicators in Spain and in the EU, 2006, 2010

10. France
VET indicators for France for the most recent year available
France 45
France’s performance on a range of indicators Based on 2009 data, the employment rate for
selected to monitor progress in VET and lifelong IVET graduates (aged 20-34) at ISCED 3-4 (76.6%)
learning across the European Union (EU) is is slightly below the EU average (79.1%). Whether
summarised below. The chart compares the these graduates are more or less likely to be
situation in France with that of the EU based on employed than other young people in the same
the most recent data available (this differs by age group is also of interest. Data presented here
indicator). Data in the chart are presented as an compare these graduates with those from general
index where the EU average equals 100. If the education at the same ISCED level and graduates
index for a selected indicator for France is 100, at lower ISCED level (2 or below). A positive figure
then its performance equals the EU average. If indicates that IVET graduates are more likely to be
the index is 90, its performance is 90% of (or 10% in employment and a negative figure that they are
below) the EU average. If the index is 200, France’s less likely to be so. IVET graduates in France enjoy
performance is twice (or 200%) the EU average. a positive employment premium on both measures.
For some indicators, such as early leavers from Their employment rate is 0.6 percentage points
education and training, a country is performing higher than that of their counterparts from general
better if its score is below that of the EU average. education (a positive but small premium and lower
Data on which the index scores have been than the EU average premium of 5.6 percentage
calculated are presented in the table, which points); but the employment rate of IVET graduates
also shows changes over time. A technical is, more markedly, 16.9 percentage points higher
definition of each indicator is provided in Annex than the employment rate of graduates with lower-
1 which also includes the years used to calculate level qualifications (almost in line with EU average
each indicator. premium of 17.4 percentage points). All these
employment figures relate to 2009 and exclude the
Key points young in further education.
Access, attractiveness and flexibility Overall transitions and employment trends

The share of upper secondary students in vocational In this section all data refer to 2012 unless otherwise
programmes in France (44.6%) is slightly below stated.
the EU average (50.3%; data for 2011). At upper The percentage of early leavers from education
secondary level, participation in combined work- and training (11.6%) is lower than the EU average
and school-based vocational programmes is in line (12.8%). France is above the Europe 2020 average
with the EU average (approximately 27%). Data for target (10%) and the national target (9.5%).
2012 reveal that the share of adults who participate in Between 2010 and 2012, the percentage of early
lifelong learning is lower (5.7%) than the EU as whole leavers fell slightly: the score for 2010 was 12.6%.
(9.0%). Between 2010 and 2012 these data show The percentage of 30 to 34 year-olds with
an increase, but are still below the average target tertiary-level education is relatively high, and has
(15%) set by the strategic framework ‘education been rising from 2006 to 2010, but stabilising from
and training 2020’. The percentages of older, low- 2010 to 2012. France has surpassed the Europe
educated and unemployed adults participating in 2020 average target of 40%, but is still short of its
lifelong learning are all lower than the corresponding national target of 50%. The share of adults with
EU averages. lower levels of educational attainment (27.5%) is
marginally higher than in the EU as a whole (25.8%).
Skill development and labour market relevance The employment rate for 20 to 64 year-olds, the
Data for 2010 on VET expenditure give relatively unemployment rate for 20 to 34 year-olds, and the
high scores for France. Public expenditure on IVET NEET rate (for 18 to 24 year-olds) differ very little
per student is EUR 14 813 per student, compared from those of the EU as a whole.
to EUR 8 549 for the EU as a whole. Company
expenditure on CVT courses is 1.6% of labour cost;
this is 0.8% for the EU as a whole. The percentage
of upper secondary IVET graduates in STEM
subjects (27.7%) is slightly below the EU average
(29.4% in 2011). The share of enterprises which
provide training to support innovation (60.3%)
exceeded the EU average share in 2010 (41.5%).
On the way to 2020:
Score on VET indicators in France and in the EU, 2006, 2010

11. Croatia
VET indicators for Croatia for the most recent year available
On the way to 2020:
Croatia’s performance on a range of indicators Skill development and labour market relevance
selected to monitor progress in VET and lifelong Data for many of the indicators relating to skill
learning across the European Union (EU) is development and labour market relevance
summarised below. The chart compares the are unavailable. For most indicators available,
situation in Croatia with that of the EU based on differences with the EU average are limited. The
the most recent data available (this differs by percentage of 30 to 34 year-olds with tertiary-level
indicator). Data in the chart are presented as an VET (ISCED 5b) at 8.8% is slightly higher than the
index where the EU average equals 100. If the EU average of 8.6% (data for 2012). Enterprise
index for a selected indicator for Croatia is 100, expenditure on CVT courses, as a percentage of
then its performance equals the EU average. If total labour costs (0.4%), is half the EU average,
the index is 90, its performance is 90% of (or 10% which is in line with enterprise participation in
below) the EU average. If the index is 200, Croatia’s training recorded in the 2010 CVTS. Enterprises
performance is twice (or 200%) the EU average. are more likely to provide training to support
For some indicators, such as early leavers from innovation: 54.3% of enterprises compared with
education and training, a country is performing 41.5% in the EU (based on CIS data for 2010).
better if its score is below that of the EU average.
Data on which the index is calculated are Overall transitions and employment trends
presented in the table, which also shows changes In this section all data refer to 2012 unless otherwise
over time. A technical definition of each indicator is stated.
provided in Annex 1 which also includes the years The share of early leavers from education and
used to calculate each indicator. training (4.2%) is much lower than the EU average
in 2012 (12.8%) and lower than the Europe 2020
Key points average target (10%). The percentage of 30 to 34
year-olds with tertiary-level education is lower than
Access, attractiveness and flexibility in the EU (23.7% compared with 35.8%) and is
Participation in IVET in Croatia is well above the EU below the Europe 2020 average target (40%). The
average: in 2011 the share of IVET students (71.5%) share of adults with a relatively low-level education
as a percentage of all upper secondary students is (20.7%) is lower than in the EU (25.8%).
much higher than the EU average (50.3%). Similarly, The employment rate for the 20 to 64 year-
more women in upper secondary education are olds (55.3%) is lower than the EU average
likely to be involved in IVET than in the EU (64.4% (68.5%): between 2006 and 2012, it fell by more
versus 44.7%). Croatia has proportionately fewer than five percentage points while at the same
adults involved in lifelong learning than the EU time employment in the EU decreased by 0.5
average: 2.4% compared with 9.0% in the EU percentage points. The data show a strong
(data for 2012). From 2006 to 2010, participation increase in the unemployment rate for the 20
in lifelong learning decreased, and then improved to 34 year-olds from 18.4% in 2010 to 26.0%
slightly between 2010 and 2012, but remains in 2012, higher than the EU average (14.5%).
below the average target set by the strategic The NEET rate (22.2%) is also above the EU
framework ‘education and training 2020’ (15%). average (17.0%).
2010 CVTS data on company provision of training
and employee participation in CVT also reveal
lower scores compared with the EU average. The
percentage of employees participating in CVT
courses, as reported by their employer, is 23%
for Croatia compared with 38% across the EU. In
Croatia 15% of employees participate in employer-
sponsored on-the-job training compared with 21%
in the EU. The percentage of enterprises providing
training at 57% is lower than the EU average of
66%.
Croatia 49
Score on VET indicators in Croatia and in the EU, 2006, 2010

12. Italy
VET indicators for Italy for the most recent year available
Italy 51
Italy’s performance on a range of indicators selected percentage of 30 to 34 year-olds in 2012 who have
to monitor progress in VET and lifelong learning attained tertiary-level VET (as proxied by ISCED
across the European Union (EU) is summarised 5b qualifications) is low (0.3% in Italy, compared
below. The chart compares the situation in Italy to 8.6% in the EU). Enterprise expenditure on CVT
with that of the EU based on the most recent data courses as % of total labour cost (CVTS 2010)
available (this differs by indicator). Data in the chart are similar: Italy scores 0.4% compared to 0.8 for
are presented as an index where the EU average the EU average. For other indicators, such as the
equals 100. If the index for a selected indicator for average number of foreign languages learned in
Italy is 100, then its performance equals the EU IVET, workers with skills matched to their duties and
average. If the index is 90, its performance is 90% workers helped to improve their work by training,
of (or 10% below) the EU average. If the index is the scores are slightly higher than the EU average.
200, Italy’s performance is twice (or 200%) the EU Based on 2009 data, the employment rate of IVET
average. For some indicators, such as early leavers graduates (aged 20-34) at ISCED 3-4 (74.6%) is
from education and training, a country is performing lower than the EU average (79.1%). Whether these
better if its score is below that of the EU average. graduates are more or less likely to be employed
Data on which the index is calculated are than other young people in the same age group
presented in the table, which also shows changes is also of interest. Data presented here compare
over time. A technical definition of each indicator is these graduates to those from general education at
provided in Annex 1 which also includes the years same ISCED level and those at lower ISCED level
used to calculate each indicator. (2 or below). A positive figure indicates that IVET
graduates are more likely to be in employment and a
Key points negative figure that they are less likely to be so. IVET
graduates in Italy enjoy a positive premium on both
Access, attractiveness and flexibility measures. Their employment rate is 7.8 percentage
Italy scores quite highly compared with the EU points higher than for counterparts from general
average on participation in IVET (data for 2011), the education (they enjoy a positive employment
share of IVET students as a percentage all upper premium and this is above the corresponding
secondary students being higher (60.0%) than the EU average premium of 5.6 percentage points);
EU average (50.3%). In contrast, data for 2012 show their employment rate is 14.6 percentage points
that Italy has proportionately fewer adults involved higher than that of graduates with lower-level
in lifelong learning (6.6%) than the EU as a whole qualifications. All these employment figures relate
(9.0%). Those with low-level education and older to 2009 and exclude the young in further education.
people are generally less likely to engage in lifelong
learning. Since 2006, the overall lifelong learning Overall transitions and employment trends
rate has slightly increased, yet Italy is still below the In this section all data refer to 2012 unless otherwise
average target (15%) set by the strategic framework stated.
‘education and training 2020’. Similarly, incidence Comparative indicators for early leavers from
of (and participation in) employer-sponsored education and training (17.6% in Italy, 12.8% in the
training – derived from the 2010 CVTS data – have EU), the unemployment rate for 20 to 34 year-olds
increased compared to 2005, but still stand below (18.5% in Italy, 14.5% in the EU), and the NEET
the EU averages. For example, in 2010, 36% of rate for 18 to 24 year-olds (27.0% in Italy, 17.0%
employees participated in CVT courses compared in the EU) are all relatively high. The percentage of
to 38% in the EU, and 56% of employers reported early leavers (17.6%) is higher than both the Europe
providing training compared with the EU average 2020 average target (10%) and the national target
of 66%. For employee participation in on-the-job (15.5%). The percentage of 30 to 34 year-olds who
training, the differences are more pronounced: 11% have tertiary-level education is lower than the EU
for Italy, 21% for the EU as a whole. The percentage average (21.7% versus 35.8%): this is lower than
of individuals who wanted to train, but did not is both the national target (26-27%) and the Europe
relatively large in Italy (17.9%) compared to the 2020 average target (40%). Between 2006 and
figure for the EU as a whole (10.9% in 2011). 2010 and between 2010 and 2012 the percentage
of people who attained tertiary-level education
Skill development and labour market relevance increased but at a lower rate than in the EU over
Within this group of indicators, there are few the same period.
with lower scores than the EU as a whole. The
On the way to 2020:
Score on VET indicators in Italy and in the EU, 2006, 2010

13. Cyprus
VET indicators for Cyprus for the most recent year available
On the way to 2020:
The performance of Cyprus on a range of Skill development and labour market relevance
indicators selected to monitor progress in VET Figures for Cyprus are particularly high for several
and lifelong learning across the European Union indicators in this group. The percentage of 30
(EU) is summarised below. The chart compares to 34 year-olds who have attained tertiary-level
the situation of Cyprus with that of the EU based VET (ISCED 5b) is substantially higher than the
on the most recent data available (this differs by EU average (13.3% compared to 8.6%, in 2012).
indicator). Data in the chart are presented as an Similarly, the percentage of innovative enterprises
index where the EU average equals 100. If the index providing supportive training (90.7%) is much
for a selected indicator for Cyprus is 100, then its higher than the EU average (41.5%) (based on 2010
performance equals the EU average. If the index data).
is 90, its performance is 90% of (or 10% below) Based on 2009 data, the employment rate of IVET
the EU average. If the index is 200, the Cyprus graduates (aged 20-34) at ISCED 3-4 (88.1%) is
performance is twice (or 200%) the EU average. also above the EU average (79.1%). Whether these
For some indicators, such as early leavers from graduates are more or less likely to be employed
education and training, a country is performing than other young people in the same age group
better if its score is below that of the EU average. is also of interest. Data presented here compare
Data on which the index is calculated are them with graduates from general education at
presented in the table, which also shows same ISCED level and graduates at lower ISCED
changes over time. A technical definition of level (2 or below). A positive figure indicates that
each indicator is provided in Annex 1 which IVET graduates are more likely to be in employment
also includes the years used to calculate and a negative figure that they are less likely to
each indicator. be so. In Cyprus, IVET graduates enjoy a positive
premium on both measures. Their employment rate
Key points is 4.2 percentage points higher than that of their
counterparts from general education (even though
Access, attractiveness and flexibility this is slightly lower than the EU average premium
Participation in IVET in Cyprus is relatively low of 5.6 percentage points), and the employment
compared with the EU average in 2011. The rate of IVET graduates is 13.3 percentage points
percentage of upper secondary students enrolled higher than that of graduates with lower-level
in IVET programmes (12.7%) is significantly lower qualifications. All these employment figures relate
than the EU average (50.3%). For women the to 2009 and exclude the young in further education.
difference is even greater (4.3% for Cyprus; 44.7% Public expenditure on IVET as a percentage of
for the EU). In 2012, the percentage of adults GDP in 2010 (0.34%) is below the EU average
participating in lifelong learning (7.4%) is lower than (0.71%) but expenditure per student is higher (EUR
the EU average (9.0%). 15 613 in Cyprus and EUR 8 549 in the EU).
Data from the 2010 CVTS suggest that the share
of enterprises providing training in Cyprus is higher Overall transitions and employment trends
than the EU average (72% Cyprus, 66% the EU). It In this section all data refer to 2012 unless otherwise
was lower in 2005. Employees are slightly less likely stated.
to participate in on-the-job training (18% Cyprus, The unemployment rate for 20 to 34 year-olds is
21% the EU in 2010).The proportion of individuals higher than the EU average (16.2% versus 14.5%),
who wanted to train but did not is higher in Cyprus and the employment rate for 20 to 64 year-olds is
at 24.8% compared with 10.9% in the EU (data for higher (70.2% versus 68.5%). The unemployment
2011). rate appears to have grown more rapidly in Cyprus
than in the EU since 2010. The share of 30 to 34
year-olds with tertiary-level education already
exceeds the Europe 2020 average target (40%). At
49.9%, this share has also surpassed the national
target (46%).
Cyprus 55
Score on VET indicators in Cyprus and in the EU, 2006, 2010

14. Latvia
VET indicators for Latvia for the most recent year available
Latvia 57
Latvia’s performance on a range of indicators olds who have attained tertiary-level VET (1.7%) is
selected to monitor progress in VET and lifelong lower than the corresponding EU average (8.6% in
learning across the European Union (EU) is 2012). Data from 2010 reveal that enterprises are
summarised below. The chart compares the less likely to provide training to support innovation
situation in Latvia with that of the EU based on (35.7% compared with 41.5% in the EU).
the most recent data available (this differs by Based on 2009 data, the employment rate
indicator). Data in the chart are presented as an of IVET graduates (aged 20-34) at ISCED 3-4
index where the EU average equals 100. If the (73.0%) is lower than the EU average (79.1%).
index for a selected indicator for Latvia is 100, Whether these graduates are more or less likely
then its performance equals the EU average. If to be employed than other young people in the
the index is 90, its performance is 90% of (or 10% same age group is also of interest. Data presented
below) the EU average. If the index is 200, Latvia’s here compare them with graduates from general
performance is twice (or 200%) the EU average. education at the same ISCED level and graduates
For some indicators, such as early leavers from at lower ISCED level (2 or below). A positive figure
education and training, a country is performing indicates that IVET graduates are more likely to
better if its score is below that of the EU average. be in employment and a negative figure that they
Data on which the index is calculated are are less likely to be so. IVET graduates in Latvia
presented in the table, which also shows changes enjoy a positive premium on both measures.
over time. A technical definition of each indicator is Their employment rate is 10.8 percentage points
provided in Annex 1 which also includes the years higher than that of their counterparts from general
used to calculate each indicator. education (well above the EU average premium
of 5.6 percentage points); their employment rate
Key points is also 27.5 percentage points higher than that
of graduates with lower-level qualifications (also
Access, attractiveness and flexibility above the EU average of 17.4 percentage points).
The percentage of upper secondary students All these employment figures relate to 2009 and
enrolled in IVET in Latvia (37.8% in 2011) is lower exclude the young in further education.
than the EU average (50.3%). The share of adults
participating in lifelong learning (7.0% in 2012) is Overall transitions and employment trends
also lower than the EU average (9.0%): Latvia is still In this section all data refer to 2012 (unless
below the average target (15%) set by the strategic otherwise stated).
framework ‘education and training 2020’. Similarly, The percentage of early leavers from education
lifelong learning participation rates for particular and training (10.5%) is below the EU average
subgroups of adults (older and unemployed (12.8%): at this level, it is just above the Europe
people) are relatively low when compared with the 2020 average target (10%), but below the national
EU. Based on 2010 CVTS 4 data, the percentage target (13.4%). The percentage of 30 to 34 year-
of enterprises providing training (40%) is below olds with tertiary-level education is slightly higher
the EU average (66%), and the percentage of than the EU average (37.0% and 35.8%) and the
employees participating in CVT courses at 24% is percentage of people with low-level education
also below the EU average of 38%, while employee is relatively low (10.9% compared with 25.8% in
participation in on-the-job training is on par with it. the EU). By 2012, at 37%, the attainment of the
30 to 34 year-olds in tertiary-level education had
Skill development and labour market relevance surpassed the national target (35%) but is still
Indicators on skill development and labour market below the Europe 2020 average target (40%). The
relevance show a mixed picture. At 0.43%, employment rate for the 20 to 64 year-olds (68.2%)
IVET expenditure as a share of overall GDP is is not far off the EU average (68.5%). The NEET
below the EU average of 0.71%. This is also rate (17.4%) is more or less the same as in the EU
reflected in the lower spend per student (EUR (17.0%). The unemployment rate of 20 to 34 year-
3 512 compared with the EU average EUR 8 549) olds (16.4%) is higher than the EU average (14.5%).
(data on expenditure refer to 2010 and to IVET
at ISCED 3-4). The percentage of graduates in
STEM subjects from upper secondary-level IVET
is higher than on average in the EU (37.4% and
29.4% respectively). The share of 30 to 34 year-
On the way to 2020:
Score on VET indicators in Latvia and in the EU, 2006, 2010

15. Lithuania
VET indicators for Lithuania for the most recent year available
On the way to 2020:
Lithuania’s performance on a range of indicators 30 to 34 year-olds who have attained tertiary-level

selected to monitor progress in VET and lifelong VET (ISCED 5b) is relatively high compared with the
learning across the European Union (EU) is EU average (12.7% versus 8.6% in 2012) showing
summarised below. The chart compares the VET as an important determinant of tertiary-level
situation in Lithuania with that of the EU based attainment for young people.
on the most recent data available (this differs by Data from 2009 show that the employment rate for
indicator). Data in the chart are presented as an IVET graduates (aged 20-34) at ISCED 3-4 (71.9%)
index where the EU average equals 100. If the index is below the EU average (79.1%). Whether these
for a selected indicator for Lithuania is 100, then graduates are more or less likely to be employed
its performance equals the EU average. If the index than other young people in the same age group
is 90, its performance is 90% of (or 10% below) is also of interest. Data presented here compare
the EU average. If the index is 200, Lithuania’s them with graduates from general education at the
performance is twice (or 200%) the EU average. same ISCED level and graduates at lower ISCED
For some indicators, such as early leavers from level (2 or below). A positive figure indicates that
education and training, a country is performing IVET graduates are more likely to be in employment
better if its score is below that of the EU average. and a negative figure that they are less likely to be
Data on which the index is calculated are so. IVET graduates in Lithuania enjoy a positive
presented in the table, which also shows changes premium on both measures. Their employment rate
over time. A technical definition of each indicator is is 12.6 percentage points higher than that of their
provided in Annex 1 which also includes the years counterparts from general education (this is above
used to calculate each indicator. the corresponding EU average premium of 5.6
percentage points); their employment rate is 19.0
Key points percentage points higher than that of graduates
with lower-level qualifications (this a higher
Access, attractiveness and flexibility premium than the EU average of 17.4 percentage
IVET students comprise a relatively low share of points). All these employment figures relate to 2009
the overall upper secondary student population and exclude the young in further education.
(28.4% compared with 50.3% in the EU in 2011).
Data for 2012 show that the percentage of adults Overall transitions and employment trends
participating in lifelong learning (5.2%) is less than In this section all data refer to 2012 unless otherwise
half the EU average (9.0%) and is well below the stated.
average target (15%) set by the strategic framework The percentage of early leavers from education
‘education and training 2020’. Based on 2010 CVTS and training (6.5%) is lower than the EU average
data, the percentage of employers providing training (12.6%) and below the national target (9.0%) and
(52%) is lower than the EU average (66%), but has the Europe 2020 average target (10%). Educational
increased from 46% in 2005. The percentage of attainment is relatively high: the percentage of
employees participating in CVT courses at 19% 30 to 34 year-olds who have attained tertiary-
is half the EU average of 38%, but the percentage level education (48.7%) is above the EU average
of employers participating in on-the-job training at (35.8%). The percentage of people with only lower-
25% is higher than the EU average of 21%. level educational attainment is relatively low (6.6%
compared with 25.8% in the EU). The percentage
Skill development and labour market relevance of 30 to 34 year-olds with tertiary-level education
Data for 2010 show that public expenditure on had risen further to 48.7%, above the Europe 2020
IVET as a percentage of GDP (0.27%) is less average target and the national target, both set at
than half the EU average (0.71%). This is also 40%.
reflected in the relatively low spend per student Of 20 to 64 year-olds, 68.7% are employed,
(EUR 3 635 compared to EUR 8 549 in the EU). which is more or less the same as the EU average
These expenditure data refer to 2010 and to IVET (68.5%). The NEET rate is relatively low (14.9%
at ISCED 3-4. The average number of foreign versus 17.0% in the EU), but the unemployment
languages learned by upper secondary IVET rate of 20 to 34 year-olds is higher than the EU
students (0.8) is below the EU average (1.2 in 2011). average (16.1% compared to 14.5%). The NEET
The percentage of graduations in STEM subjects rate fell back to 14.9% (17.0% across the EU),
from upper secondary IVET (29.0%) is more or less compared with 18.2% in 2010.
the same as in the EU (29.4%). The percentage of
Lithuania 61
Score on VET indicators in Lithuania and in the EU, 2006, 2010

16. Luxembourg
VET indicators for Luxembourg for the most recent year available
Luxembourg 63
Luxembourg’s performance on a range of tertiary-level VET decreased between 2010 and

indicators selected to monitor progress in VET 2012, this share is still higher than the EU average
and lifelong learning across the European Union (11.7% versus 8.6%). The same is true for the
(EU) is summarised below. The chart compares the percentage of innovative enterprises providing
situation in Luxembourg with that of the EU based supportive training (68.2% versus 41.5% in the EU
on the most recent data available (this differs by in 2010).
indicator). Data in the chart are presented as an Based on 2009 data, the employment rate of IVET
index where the EU average equals 100. If the index graduates (aged 20-34) at ISCED 3-4 (89.8%) is
for a selected indicator for Luxembourg is 100, then higher than the EU average (79.1%). Whether these
its performance equals the EU average. If the index graduates are more or less likely to be employed
is 90, its performance is 90% of (or 10% below) than other young people in the same age group
the EU average. If the index is 200, Luxembourg’s is also of interest. Data presented here compare
performance is twice (or 200%) the EU average. them with graduates from general education at
Data on which the index is calculated are and a negative figure that they are less likely to be
presented in the table, which also shows so. IVET graduates in Luxembourg enjoy a positive
changes over time. A technical definition of premium on both measures. Their employment rate
each indicator is provided in Annex 1 which is 8.5 percentage points higher than that of their
also includes the years used to calculate counterparts from general education (this is higher
each indicator. than the EU average premium of 5.6 percentage
points); their employment rate is 15.6 percentage
Key points points higher than that of graduates with lower-level
qualifications. All these employment figures relate
Access, attractiveness and flexibility to 2009 and exclude the young in further education.
Participation in IVET and CVET in Luxembourg is The share of graduates in STEM subjects from
quite high. The percentage of employees receiving upper secondary vocational education is 25.4%
CVT training courses, as reported by their employer (31.2% on average in the EU).
and derived from the 2010 CVTS data, is relatively
high compared with the EU average (51% versus Overall transitions and employment trends
38%). Similarly, indicators of participation in lifelong In this section all data refer to 2012 unless otherwise
learning in 2012 for various target groups (such as stated.
the unemployed) are all well above the EU average, A generally favourable picture emerges for
even though figures are based on small sample Luxembourg, but most data are based on a small
sizes and should be interpreted with caution. sample size and should be interpreted with caution.
The overall rate of adult participation in lifelong Levels of educational attainment are generally
learning (13.9%) is above the EU average (9.0%) higher than in the EU overall, the unemployment
and has slightly increased since 2010; Luxembourg rate of 20 to 34 year-olds is lower, the NEET rate is
is close to the average target (15%) set by the lower, and employment rate of 20 to 64 year-olds
strategic framework ‘education and training 2020’. is higher.
Participation in IVET by upper secondary students
(61.4%) is above the EU average (50.3% in 2011). In
upper secondary vocational education, combined
work- and school-based programmes account for
22.9% of enrolments (27.0% in the EU).

Luxembourg is above average for several indicators
in this group.
In 2010, at ISCED 3-4, public expenditure on
IVET per student (EUR 15 614) is significantly
higher than the EU average (EUR 8 549). Although
the percentage of 30 to 34 year-olds who attained
On the way to 2020:
Score on VET indicators in Luxembourg and in the EU, 2006, 2010

17. Hungary
VET indicators for Hungary for the most recent year available
On the way to 2020:
Hungary’s performance on a range of indicators for IVET graduates (aged 20-34) at ISCED 3-4
selected to monitor progress in VET and lifelong (73.4%) is below the EU average (79.1%). Data
learning across the European Union (EU) is presented here also compare their situation with
summarised below. The chart compares the that of graduates from general education at same
situation in Hungary with that of the EU based ISCED level and graduates at lower ISCED level
on the most recent data available (this differs by (2 or below). A positive figure indicates that IVET
indicator). Data in the chart are presented as an graduates are more likely to be in employment
index where the EU average equals 100. If the index and a negative figure that they are less likely to
for a selected indicator for Hungary is 100, then its be so. IVET graduates in Hungary enjoy a positive
performance equals the EU average. If the index premium on both measures. Their employment
is 90, its performance is 90% of (or 10% below) rate is 6.3 percentage points higher than that of
the EU average. If the index is 200, Hungary’s their counterparts from general education (this is
performance is twice (or 200%) the EU average. a positive employment premium and is above the
For some indicators, such as early leavers from EU average premium of 5.6 percentage points);
education and training, a country is performing their employment rate is 29.1 percentage points
better if its score is below that of the EU average. higher than that of graduates with lower-level
Data on which the index is calculated are qualifications (also above the EU average premium
presented in the table, which also shows changes of 17.4 percentage points). All these employment
over time. A technical definition of each indicator is figures relate to 2009 and exclude the young in
provided in Annex 1 which also includes the years further education.
used to calculate each indicator.
Overall transitions and employment trends
Key points In this section all data refer to 2012 unless otherwise
stated.
Access, attractiveness and flexibility The percentage of early leavers (11.5%) is below
The share of all upper secondary students enrolled the EU average (12.8%). Though slightly increased
in vocational programmes in Hungary (26.2%) is between 2010 and 2012, it still stands above the
about half the EU average (50.3% in 2011). But Europe 2020 average target and the national target
where students are working towards a vocational (both at 10%). The share of 30 to 34 year-olds who
qualification they are more likely to be engaged in have attained tertiary-level education is relatively
combined work- and school-based programmes low at 29.9%, compared to the EU average 35.8%,
than in the EU (63.4% versus 27.0%). Data for but has been increasing, from 19.0% in 2006 and
2012 on the share of adults participating in lifelong 25.7% in 2010. This is still short of the Europe
learning also show a relatively low score (2.8% 2020 average target (40%) but very close to the
compared to 9.0% in the EU) and since 2006, the national target (30.3%). The percentage of the
share of adults participating in lifelong learning has young achieving tertiary-level education has been
fallen slightly. Older people, those with relatively rising faster than in the EU overall. The percentage
low-level education, and the unemployed are less of adults with low-level education is comparatively
likely to be in receipt of lifelong learning in Hungary low (17.9% versus 25.8%). The employment rate
than in the EU as a whole. At 49%, the share of for the 20 to 64 year-olds (62.1%) is lower than
employers providing training is less than the 66% the EU average (68.5%), but has increased from
EU average and only 19% of employees benefit 2010 to 2012 in Hungary, while it stabilised in the
from employer-sponsored CVT courses, compared EU as a whole. The NEET rate is slightly higher
to 38% in the EU (CVTS 2010 data). compared to that of the EU (19.5% versus 17.0%)
but grew more than in the EU from 2010 to 2012.
Skill development and labour market relevance The unemployment rate for the 20 to 34 year-olds
Public expenditure on IVET as a percentage of (14.7%) is very close to the EU average (14.5%).
GDP (0.32%) is relatively low compared to the
EU average (0.71%) (2010 data for ISCED 3-4).
The amount spent per student (EUR 3 383) is also
significantly below the EU average (EUR 8 549).
The share of 30 to 34 year-olds who have attained
tertiary-level VET (1.0%) is much lower than the EU
average (8.6%). Based on 2009 data, employment
Hungary 67
Score on VET indicators in Hungary and in the EU, 2006, 2010

18. Malta
VET indicators for Malta for the most recent year available
Malta 69
Malta’s performance on a range of indicators selected indicates that IVET graduates are more likely to be
to monitor progress in VET and lifelong learning in employment and a negative figure that they are
across the European Union (EU) is summarised less likely to be so. IVET graduates in Malta have
below. The chart compares the situation in Malta an employment rate 3.6 percentage points lower
with that of the EU based on the most recent data than their counterparts from general education; on
available (this differs by indicator). Data in the chart average, the opposite situation occurs with VET
are presented as an index where the EU average graduates, enjoying an average positive premium
equals 100. If the index for a selected indicator for of 5.6 percentage points. However, IVET graduates
Malta is 100, then its performance equals the EU have an employment rate 21.4 percentage points
average. If the index is 90, its performance is 90% higher than those with lower-level qualifications (this
of (or 10% below) the EU average. If the index is is above the corresponding EU average premium
200, Malta’s performance is twice (or 200%) the EU of 17.4 percentage points). All these employment
average. For some indicators, such as early leavers figures relate to 2009 and exclude the young in
from education and training, a country is performing further education.
better if its score is below that of the EU average.
Data on which the index is calculated are Overall transitions and employment trends
presented in the table, which also shows In this section all data refer to 2012 (unless
changes over time. A technical definition of otherwise stated).
each indicator is provided in Annex 1 which The percentage of early leavers from education
also includes the years used to calculate and training (22.6%) is much higher than the EU
each indicator. average (12.8%), and much higher than the Europe
2020 average target (10%). The percentage of 30
Key points to 34 year-olds who have attained tertiary-level
education (22.4%) is lower than the EU average
Access, attractiveness and flexibility (35.8%). At 22.4%, the figure for Malta remains
Based on 2011 provisional data, the share of upper lower than both the national target (33%) and the
secondary students enrolled in IVET programmes Europe 2020 average target (40%). There is a much
in Malta is 38.9%. This should be interpreted with higher share of adults with low-level education in
caution since, even though with big fluctuations, Malta compared with the EU (61.9% versus 25.8%).
values for Malta have been much higher in recent The employment rate for 20 to 64 year-olds
past. Malta has proportionately fewer adults (63.1%) is lower than the EU average of (68.5%) as
involved in lifelong learning than the EU as a whole is the NEET rate (11.7% compared to 17.0%). The
(7.0% compared with an EU average of 9.0% in unemployment rate for 20 to 34 year-olds is much
2012). This percentage is below the average target lower in Malta (6.3%) than in the EU (14.5%).
(15%) set by the strategic framework ‘education
and training 2020’.

Data from 2010 show that public expenditure on
IVET as a percentage of GDP (0.47%) is below
the EU average (0.71%). Similarly, data from
2010 show that the share of enterprises providing
training to support innovation is relatively low
(36.9% of innovative enterprises) compared to the
EU average (41.5%).
Based on 2009 data, the employment rate of
is higher than the EU average (79.1%). Whether
these graduates are more or less likely to be
employed than other young people in the same
age group is also of interest. Data presented here
compare these graduates with those from general
education at same ISCED level and graduates at
lower ISCED level (2 or below). A positive figure
On the way to 2020:
Score on VET indicators in Malta and in the EU, 2006, 2010

19. The Netherlands
VET indicators for the Netherlands for the most recent year available
On the way to 2020:
The Netherlands’ performance on a range of secondary school with a STEM qualification

indicators selected to monitor progress in VET (17.7%) is lower than the EU average (29.4%). The
and lifelong learning across the European Union percentage of 30 to 34 year-olds with tertiary-level
(EU) is summarised below. The chart compares VET attainment (2.9%) is lower than the EU average
the situation in the Netherlands with that of the EU (8.6%).
based on the most recent data available (this differs Based on 2009 data, a relatively high percentage
by indicator). Data in the chart are presented as of those aged 20 to 34 graduating from the VET
an index where the EU average equals 100. If the stream at medium level of education are likely to
index for a selected indicator for the Netherlands is be in employment (90.6% compared with 79.1%
100, then its performance equals the EU average. in the EU). Data presented here also compare the
If the index is 90, its performance is 90% of (or situation of these graduates with that of graduates
10% below) the EU average. If the index is 200, from general education at same ISCED level and
the Netherlands’ performance is twice (or 200%) at lower ISCED level (2 or below). A positive figure
the EU average. For some indicators, such as early indicates that IVET graduates are more likely to be in
leavers from education and training, a country is employment and a negative figure that they are less
performing better if its score is below that of the likely to be so. In the Netherlands, IVET graduates
EU average. enjoy a positive premium on both measures.
Data on which the index is calculated are Their employment rate is 4.7 percentage points
presented in the table, which also shows changes higher than that of their counterparts from general
over time. A technical definition of each indicator is education (this is a positive employment premium,
provided in Annex 1 which also includes the years even though smaller than the EU average premium
used to calculate each indicator. of 5.6 percentage points); the employment rate of
IVET graduates is 13.7 percentage points higher
Key points than that of graduates with lower-level qualifications
(the corresponding EU average premium is
Access, attractiveness and flexibility 17.4 percentage points). All these employment
The Netherlands has relatively high scores within figures relate to 2009 and exclude the young in
this group of indicators. The percentage of IVET further education.
students in upper secondary education (69.1%) is
higher than the EU average (50.3% in 2011). VET Overall transitions and employment trends
graduates are more likely to continue in further In this section all data refer to 2012 unless otherwise
education and training (46.2%) than in the EU stated.
(30.7%, data for 2009). Participation in lifelong In this section all data refer to 2012 unless
learning is also relatively high (data for 2012). otherwise stated. Although it needs to be borne in
This includes older adults who are more likely to mind that much of the data for 2012 are provisional,
participate in lifelong learning (10.4% versus 5.3% the comparison between the Netherlands and the
in the EU), lower-educated people (10.0% versus EU is much the same in 2012 as it was in 2010.
3.9% in the EU), and the unemployed (16.2% versus The Netherlands scores relatively highly on nearly
9.0% in the EU). The Netherlands also scores high all the indicators in this group. The percentage of
in the proportion of non-formal education and early leavers from education at 8.8% is lower than
training which is job-related (89.4% versus 81.4% the EU average of 12.8% and below the Europe
in the EU in 2011). 2020 average target of 10%. The percentage of
30 to 34 year-olds who have achieved a tertiary-
Skill development and labour market relevance level education is higher than the EU average:
The performance of the Netherlands on this set 42.3% in the Netherlands versus 35.8% in the
of indicators is mixed. Levels of expenditure on EU. This is higher than both the national target
training (IVET and CVET) are relatively high, but of 45% and the Europe 2020 average target
the percentage of both those graduating from of 40%.
upper secondary school with a STEM qualification The percentage of young people who are NEET
(2011) and those aged 30 to 34 with tertiary-VET at 5.7% is much lower than the EU average of
educational attainment (2012) are relatively low. 17.0%. Similarly, the percentage of 20 to 34 year-
The level of expenditure on IVET, at 0.84% of olds who are unemployed (5.6%) is less than half
GDP, is higher than the EU average of 0.71%. that in the EU (14.5%). The employment rate for
The average level of expenditure per student at 22 to 64 year-olds (77.2%) is higher than the EU
EUR 9 006 is higher than the EU average of EUR average of (68.5%).
8 549. Expenditure on CVT by enterprises – as a The only indicator where the performance of the
percentage of labour costs – is relatively high at Netherland is less favourable compared with that
1.2% compared to 0.8% in the EU. of the EU is the percentage of adults with relatively
The percentage of those graduating from upper low educational attainment (26.8% versus 25.8%).
the Netherlands 73
Score on VET indicators in the Netherlands and in the EU, 2006, 2010
20. Austria
VET indicators for Austria for the most recent year available
Austria 75
Austria’s performance on a range of indicators (aged 20-34) at ISCED 3-4 (88.0%) is also higher
selected to monitor progress in VET and lifelong than the EU average (79.1%) (calculations are for
learning across the European Union (EU) is 2009 and exclude individuals in further education).
summarised below. The chart compares the Whether these graduates are more or less likely to
situation in Austria with that of the EU based on be employed than other young people in the same
the most recent data available (this differs by age group is also of interest. Data presented here
indicator). Data in the chart are presented as an compare these graduates with those from general
index where the EU average equals 100. If the education at same ISCED level and at lower ISCED
index for a selected indicator for Austria is 100, level (2 or below). A positive figure indicates that
then its performance equals the EU average. If IVET graduates are more likely to be in employment
the index is 90, its performance is 90% of (or 10% and a negative figure that they are less likely to
below) the EU average. If the index is 200, Austria’s be so. In Austria, IVET graduates enjoy a positive
performance is twice (or 200%) the EU average. premium on both measures. Their employment
For some indicators, such as early leavers from rate is 5.1 percentage points higher than that
education and training, a country is performing of their counterparts from general education
better if its score is below that of the EU average. (approximately in line with the EU average premium
Data on which the index is calculated are of 5.6 percentage points); their employment rate
presented in the table, which also shows changes is also 26.4 percentage points higher than that of
over time. A technical definition of each indicator is graduates with lower-level qualifications (this is
provided in Annex 1 which also includes the years above the EU average premium of 17.4 percentage
used to calculate each indicator. points). All employment figures relate to 2009 and
Key points Austria also has a relatively high percentage of
innovative enterprises providing supportive training
Access, attractiveness and flexibility in the workplace (59.1% compared to 41.5% in the
Levels of participation in Austria tend to be higher EU, based on 2010 CIS data).
than the EU average, especially for participation
in IVET and lifelong learning. In 2011, the Overall transitions and employment trends
share of upper secondary students enrolled in In this section all data refer to 2012 unless otherwise
vocational programmes (76.1%) is higher than the stated.
corresponding EU average (50.3%). Data for 2012 The share of early leavers from education and
show that Austria has a relatively high share of its training (7.6%) is lower than the EU average
adult population participating in lifelong learning (12.8%). This percentage has decreased slightly
(14.1% compared with 9.0% in the EU), even more over recent years and is below both the Europe
so for participation of the unemployed (18.5% for 2020 average target (10%) and the national target
Austria versus 9.0% for the EU as a whole). The (9.5%). The NEET rate (7.8%) and the 20 to 34
share of adults participating in lifelong learning year-olds unemployment rate (5.8%) are below
increased from 2006 to 2010 and again from 2010 the respective averages in the EU (17.0% and
to 2012. Employers in Austria are more likely to 14.5%). The share of adults with a low educational
report the provision of training (87% of employers attainment is relatively small (16.9% in Austria,
do so, compared to 66% in the EU, based on 2010 25.8% in the EU). The only indicator where Austria
CVTS data). However, the shares of employees compares less favourably with the EU is the share
participating in employer-sponsored CVT courses of 30 to 34 year-olds who have attained tertiary-
and on-the-job training are lower than the EU level education (26.3% in Austria; 35.8% in the EU).
average (33% versus 38% and 12% versus 21% This is below both the Europe 2020 average target
respectively, also based on the 2010 CVTS data). (40%) and the national target (38%).

Indicators on skill development and labour market
relevance tend to show higher levels than the
corresponding EU averages. In 2010, public
expenditure on IVET at ISCED 3-4 accounted for
1.04% of GDP, higher than in the EU (0.71%).
The employment rate for young IVET graduates
On the way to 2020:
Score on VET indicators in Austria and in the EU, 2006, 2010

21. Poland
VET indicators for Poland for the most recent year available
On the way to 2020:
Poland’s performance on a range of indicators STEM graduates account for a relatively high share
selected to monitor progress in VET and lifelong of all graduates from upper secondary VET (39.8%
learning across the European Union (EU) is compared with 29.4% across the EU). Data for 2010
summarised below. The chart compares the show that the share of enterprises providing training
situation in Poland with that of the EU based on to support innovation is also relatively high (55.4%
the most recent data available (this differs by of enterprises) compared with the EU average of
indicator). Data in the chart are presented as an 41.5%. The average number of foreign languages
index where the EU average equals 100. If the learned by students in upper-secondary-level IVET
index for a selected indicator for Poland is 100, (1.6) is higher than the EU average (1.2).
then its performance equals the EU average. If Based on 2009 data, the employment rate of
the index is 90, its performance is 90% of (or 10% IVET graduates (aged 20-34) at ISCED 3-4 (73.8%)
below) the EU average. If the index is 200, Poland’s is lower than the EU average (79.1%). Whether
performance is twice (or 200%) the EU average. these graduates are more or less likely to be
For some indicators, such as early leavers from employed than other young people in the same
education and training, a country is performing age group is also of interest. Data presented here
better if its score is below that of the EU average. compare the situation of these graduates with
Data on which the index is calculated are counterparts from general education at same
presented in the table, which also shows changes ISCED level and graduates at lower ISCED level
over time. A technical definition of each indicator is (2 or below). A positive figure indicates that IVET
provided in Annex 1 which also includes the years graduates are more likely to be in employment and
used to calculate each indicator. a negative figure that they are less likely to be so.
IVET graduates in Poland enjoy a positive premium
Key points on both measures. Their employment rate is
4.8 percentage points higher than that of their
Access, attractiveness and flexibility counterparts from general education (slightly lower
IVET participation in Poland, measured by the share than the EU average of 5.6 percentage points)
of upper secondary students in the vocational and their employment rate is also 19.6 percentage
stream, is close to the EU average (48.3% for Poland; points higher than that of graduates with lower-
50.3% for the EU in 2011). Participation has been level qualifications (higher than the EU average of
growing in Poland while it has been in slight decline 17.4 percentage points). All employment figures
across the EU from 2006 to 2010. For women, the relate to 2009 and exclude the young in further
share of upper secondary students in IVET (37.2%) education.
is somewhat lower than the EU average (44.7%). In
upper secondary vocational education, the share Overall transitions and employment trends
of students in combined work- and school-based In this section all data refer to 2012 unless otherwise
programmes (13.7%) is about half the EU average stated.
share (27.0%) and has been relatively stable over The percentage of early leavers from education
recent years. Young VET graduates are more likely and training in Poland (5.7 %) is much lower than
to engage in further education and training (38.4%) the EU average (12.8%). At this level, the country
than is the case across the EU (30.7% in the EU, is already below the Europe 2020 average target
based on 2009 data). (10%), but not yet below the national target (4.5%).
Provisional data for 2012 reveal that Poland has The share of 30 to 34 year-olds who have attained
proportionally fewer adults involved in lifelong tertiary-level education (provisional estimates at
learning than the EU as a whole (4.5% and 9.0% 39.1%) is higher than the EU average (35.8%), and
respectively). For older and lower-educated adults, has increased faster than in the EU as a whole. It
participation level differences are greater between is still below the Europe 2020 average target (40%)
Poland and the EU, reflected by the low index and the national target (45%). The percentage of
numbers in the chart. According to 2010 CVTS adults with low-level education (10.4%) is lower
data, 22% of employers reported providing training than the EU average (25.8%).
compared with 66% in the EU; 31% of employees The employment rate for 20 to 64 year-olds
took CVT courses compared with 38% in the EU. (64.7%) is lower than that of the EU (68.5%). The
unemployment rate of the 20 to 34 year-olds is
Skill development and labour market relevance slightly lower (14.0% for Poland; 14.5% for the
Public expenditure on IVET as a percentage of EU), as is the NEET rate (15.9% compared with
GDP (0.55%) is lower than the EU average (0.71%) the EU average 17.0%). The NEET rate and the
(based on 2010 data). The amount spent per unemployment rate of 20 to 34 year-olds have
student is also below the EU average (EUR 3 971 been falling from 2006 to 2010 and from 2010 to
in Poland and EUR 8 549 in the EU). In contrast, 2012 while increasing across the EU as a whole.
Poland 79
Score on VET indicators in Poland and in the EU, 2006, 2010

22. Portugal
VET indicators for Portugal for the most recent year available
Portugal 81
Portugal’s performance on a range of indicators data). Portugal also scores higher than the EU
selected to monitor progress in VET and lifelong average on workers with skills matched to their
learning across the European Union (EU) is duties (67.8% compared with 55.3% in the EU).
summarised below. The chart compares the Based on 2009 data, the employment rate of
situation in Portugal with that of the EU based 83.5% for IVET graduates (aged 20-34) at ISCED
on the most recent data available (this differs by 3-4 is higher than the EU average (79.1%). Data
indicator). Data in the chart are presented as an presented here also compare the situation of
index where the EU average equals 100. If the index these graduates with that of those from general
for a selected indicator for Portugal is 100, then its education at same ISCED level and from lower
performance equals the EU average. If the index ISCED level (2 or below). A positive figure
is 90, its performance is 90% of (or 10% below) indicates that IVET graduates are more likely to
the EU average. If the index is 200, Portugal’s be in employment and a negative figure that they
performance is twice (or 200%) the EU average. are less likely to be so. IVET graduates have an
For some indicators, such as early leavers from employment rate 1.4 percentage points lower than
education and training, a country is performing their counterparts from general education, while
better if its score is below that of the EU average. on average, and in most of countries, the opposite
Data on which the index is calculated are applies. IVET graduates have an employment rate
presented in the table, which also shows changes 5.6 percentage points higher than those with lower-
over time. A technical definition of each indicator is level qualifications, but this positive employment
provided in Annex 1 which also includes the years premium is lower than that observed across the
used to calculate each indicator. EU (17.4 percentage points). All these employment
figures relate to 2009 and exclude the young in
Key points further education.

On several indicators Portugal’s performance has In this section all data refer to 2012 unless otherwise
improved and approached or surpassed the EU stated. For many indicators, data for 2012 cannot
average level. Comparing CVTS data for 2010 with be compared with earlier years because of a
those for 2005 shows that employee participation in change in methodology.
CVT courses has surpassed the EU average (40% The share of early leavers from education and
versus 38%) and enterprise provision of training training (20.8%) is nearly twice the EU average
and employee participation in on-the-job training (12.8%). While the percentage of early leavers has
are close to the EU average. The percentage of decreased over recent years, it is still higher than
upper secondary students enrolled in IVET (42.4%) the Europe 2020 average target and the national
in 2011 is lower than the EU average (50.3%), but target (both set at 10%). The percentage of 30
has increased since 2010 (from 38.8% to 42.4%), to 34 year-olds who have attained tertiary-level
while only a slight increase was observed across education (27.2%) is relatively low compared with
the EU (from 49.9% to 50.3%). the EU average (35.8%). It is still well below the
Data for 2012, based on new methodology, Europe 2020 average target and the national target
show that adult participation in lifelong learning (both set at 40%).
is above the EU average (10.6% compared with The difference in the share of adults with lower-
9.0%). The percentage of young VET graduates level education in Portugal and the EU average is
in further education and training is also above the substantial (62.4% versus 25.8%).
EU average (32.8% in Portugal; 30.7% in the EU,
based on 2009 data).

The 2012 percentage of 30 to 34 year-olds with
tertiary-level VET qualification (ISCED 5b) is 1.4%,
lower than the corresponding EU average of
8.6%. In contrast, Portugal scores higher than the
EU on the percentage of enterprises which have
training practices supportive of innovation (56.6%
compared with 41.5% in the EU, based on 2010
On the way to 2020:
Score on VET indicators in Portugal and in the EU, 2006, 2010

23. Romania
VET indicators for Romania for the most recent year available
On the way to 2020:
Romania’s performance on a range of indicators in upper secondary IVET education is relatively

selected to monitor progress in VET and lifelong high (1.9 compared to 1.2 in the EU overall).
learning across the European Union (EU) is Based on 2009 data, the employment rate for
summarised below. The chart compares the IVET graduates (aged 20-34) at ISCED 3-4 (82.1%)
situation in Romania with that of the EU based is three percentage points above the EU average
on the most recent data available (this differs by (79.1%). Data presented here also compare these
indicator). Data in the chart are presented as an graduates with those from general education
index where the EU average equals 100. If the index at same ISCED level and at lower ISCED level (2
for a selected indicator for Romania is 100, then its or below). A positive figure indicates that IVET
performance equals the EU average. If the index graduates are more likely to be in employment
is 90, its performance is 90% of (or 10% below) and a negative figure that they are less likely to be
the EU average. If the index is 200, Romania’s so. IVET graduates in Romania enjoy a positive
performance is twice (or 200%) the EU average. premium on both measures, with an employment
For some indicators, such as early leavers from rate 4.1 percentage points higher than their
education and training, a country is performing counterparts from general education (even though
better if its score is below that of the EU average. this positive employment premium is lower than
Data on which the index is calculated are the EU average premium of 5.6 percentage
presented in the table, which also shows changes points). They also have an employment rate 15.1
over time. A technical definition of each indicator is percentage points higher than those with lower-
provided in Annex 1 which also includes the years level qualifications (even though this is lower than
used to calculate each indicator. the EU average of 17.4 percentage points). All these
employment figures relate to 2009 and exclude the
Key points young in further education.

Students in IVET programmes account for a relatively In this section all data refer to 2012 unless otherwise
high share of all students in upper secondary stated.
education (63.1% compared with 50.3% in the EU The share of early leavers from education and
in 2011). Data for 2012 show that adult participation training (17.4%) is higher than the EU average
in lifelong learning (1.4%) is lower than that of EU (12.8%) and much higher than the Europe 2020
counterparts (9.0%). The unemployed are less likely average target and the national target (both set
to engage in lifelong learning (2.1%) compared with at 10%). While the percentage of 30 to 34 year-
the EU average (9.0%). The same holds for older olds with tertiary-level education has increased
adults (0.3% versus 5.3%), but data are based on significantly (from 12.4% in 2006 to 18.1% in 2010
a small sample size and should be interpreted with and 21.8% in 2012), it is still well below the average
caution. The 2010 CVTS data indicate the extent to EU score (35.8%), Europe 2020 average target,
which employees and enterprises engage in CVET. and the national target (both set at 40%).
In 2010, 24% of employers reported providing Data show that the employment rate for 20 to 64
training compared with 60% in the EU, and 18% year-olds (63.8%) is lower than in the EU (68.5%).
of employees undertook CVT courses compared The NEET rate (20.4%) is higher than in the EU
with 38% in the EU. Similarly, a smaller share of overall (17.0%), but the unemployment rate of
employees engaged in on-the-job training: 10% in 20 to 34 year-olds (11.0%) is lower (14.5% in the
Romania and 21% in the EU. When the CVTS data EU); in recent years this unemployment rate has
of 2010 and 2005 are compared, the differences increased less rapidly in Romania than across the
between the indicator scores of Romania and EU EU as a whole.
averages have increased.

The percentage of 30 to 34 year-olds who have
attained tertiary-level VET (ISCED 5b) (1.8%) in 2010
is lower than the EU average (8.6%). Enterprise
expenditure in 2010 on CVT as a proportion of
labour cost (0.4%) is half that for Europe as a whole.
Romania 85
Score on VET indicators in Romania and in the EU, 2006, 2010

24. Slovenia
VET indicators for Slovenia for the most recent year available
Slovenia 87
Slovenia’s performance on a range of indicators contributing substantially to tertiary-level education

selected to monitor progress in VET and lifelong of the young.
learning across the European Union (EU) is Based on 2009 data, the employment rate
summarised below. The chart compares the for IVET graduates (aged 20-34) at ISCED 3-4
situation in Slovenia with that of the EU based (85.8%) is higher than the EU average (79.1%).
on the most recent data available (this differs by Whether these graduates are more or less likely
indicator). Data in the chart are presented as an to be employed than other young people in the
index where the EU average equals 100. If the index same age group is also of interest. Data presented
for a selected indicator for Slovenia is 100, then its here compare them with graduates from general
performance equals the EU average. If the index education at same ISCED level and graduates at
is 90, its performance is 90% of (or 10% below) lower ISCED level (2 or below). A positive figure
the EU average. If the index is 200, Slovenia’s indicates that IVET graduates are more likely to
performance is twice (or 200%) the EU average. be in employment and a negative figure that they
For some indicators, such as early leavers from are less likely to be so. In Slovenia, IVET graduates
education and training, a country is performing enjoy a positive premium on both measures.
better if its score is below that of the EU average. Their employment rate is 12.2 percentage points
Data on which the index is calculated are higher than that of their counterparts from general
presented in the table, which also shows changes education (higher than the EU average premium
over time. A technical definition of each indicator is of 5.6 percentage points); their employment rate
provided in Annex 1 which also includes the years is also 16.9 percentage points higher than that
used to calculate each indicator. of graduates with lower-level qualifications (EU
average premium is 17.4 percentage points). All
Key points these employment figures relate to 2009 and
Participation in IVET is high and above the EU Overall transitions and employment trends
average as measured by the percentage of In this section all data refer to 2012 unless otherwise
upper secondary students enrolled in vocational stated.
programmes (64.5% in Slovenia; 50.3% in the EU The percentage of early leavers from education
in 2011). Among female upper secondary students, and training (4.4%) is much lower than the EU
enrolment in VET is lower (57.9%) but still above the average (12.8%), and is already lower than the
EU average (44.7%). In 2011 few students in upper 2020 national target (5%). Levels of educational
secondary VET are in combined work- and school- attainment overall are high. The percentage of
based programmes (0.2%) compared with the EU 30 to 34 year-olds with tertiary-level education
(27.0%). (39.2%) is above the EU average (35.8%); this
The percentage of adults participating in lifelong figure has increased from 34.8% in 2010. The 2012
learning (13.8%) is higher than the EU average level remains below both the Europe 2020 average
(9.0% in 2012), even though it has been even higher target and the national target (both set at 40%).
(at 16.2% in 2010). The percentage of unemployed The percentage of adults with low-level education
adults participating in lifelong learning is favourably is lower (15.0%) than in the EU (25.8%).
higher (13.4% for Slovenia; 9.0% for the EU), as is The employment rate for 20 to 64 year-olds
the percentage of older adults in lifelong learning (68%) is more or less the same as the EU average
(7.1% compared with 5.3% in the EU). In contrast, (68.5%). The NEET rate (11.5%) is below that of
the percentage of low-educated adults in lifelong the EU (17.0%). The unemployment rate for 20 to
learning is lower (at 2.6% in 2012) than in the EU 34 year-olds (13.6%) is lower than the EU average
(3.9%). (14.5%). The unemployment rate of 20 to 34 year-
olds and the NEET rate have both risen since 2010.
A relatively high percentage of VET students
graduate in STEM subjects (33.7% in Slovenia
compared with 29.4% in the EU in 2011). The
percentage of 30 to 34 year-olds with tertiary-
level VET (ISCED 5b) (15.0%) is higher than the
corresponding percentage in the EU (8.6%),
On the way to 2020:
Score on VET indicators in Slovenia and in the EU, 2006, 2010

25. Slovakia
VET indicators for Slovakia for the most recent year available
On the way to 2020:
Slovakia’s performance on a range of indicators Skill development and labour market relevance
selected to monitor progress in VET and lifelong Public expenditure on IVET as a percentage of
learning across the European Union (EU) is GDP (0.77%) is slightly higher than the EU average
summarised below. The chart compares the (0.73%), but the amount spent per student (EUR
situation in Slovakia with that of the EU based 4 210) is much below the EU average (EUR 8 549)
on the most recent data available (this differs by (based on 2010 data for ISCED 3-4). Additionally,
indicator). Data in the chart are presented as an the share of the 30 to 34 year-olds who have
index where the EU average equals 100. If the index attained tertiary-level VET (ISCED 5b) (1.5%) is
for a selected indicator for Slovakia is 100, then its lower than the EU average (7.3%).
performance equals the EU average. If the index Based on 2009 data, the employment rate of IVET
is 90, its performance is 90% of (or 10% below) graduates (aged 20-34) at ISCED 3-4 (74.7%) is lower
the EU average. If the index is 200, Slovakia’s than the EU average (79.1%). Data presented here
performance is twice (or 200%) the EU average. compare the employment rate of IVET graduates
For some indicators, such as early leavers from with those of graduates from general education at
education and training, a country is performing same ISCED level and graduates at lower ISCED
better if its score is below that of the EU average. level (2 or below). A positive figure indicates that
Data on which the index is calculated are IVET graduates are more likely to be in employment
presented in the table, which also shows changes and a negative figure that they are less likely to be
over time. A technical definition of each indicator is so. IVET graduates in Slovakia enjoy a positive
provided in Annex 1 which also includes the years premium on both measures. Their employment
used to calculate each indicator. rate is 3.8 percentage points higher than that of
their counterparts from general education (even
Key points though this positive premium is lower than the EU
average premium of 5.6 percentage points) and
Access, attractiveness and flexibility their employment rate is 44.2 percentage points
Slovakia has a relatively high a proportion of upper higher than that of graduates with lower-level
secondary students participating in IVET (70.9% qualifications (well above the EU average premium
compared with 50.3% in the EU; data for 2011). of 17.4 percentage points). All these employment
Within upper secondary vocational education, figures relate to 2009 and exclude the young in
the share of IVET students involved in combined further education.
work- and school-based programmes (40.8%) is
also higher than the EU average (27.0%). The most Overall transitions and employment trends
recent data for adults involved in lifelong learning In this section all data refer to 2012 unless otherwise
are for 2012 and show that Slovakia has fewer than stated.
the EU as a whole (3.1% and 9.0% respectively): The rate of early leaving from education and
Slovakia scores below the average target of 15% training (5.3%) is much lower than for the EU as a
set by the strategic framework ‘education and whole (12.8%). Slovakia has proportionately fewer
training 2020’. The general picture from 2010 people with low-level education (8.3%) compared
CVTS data on the training activities of employers with the EU average (25.8%). In contrast, the share
is that of Slovakian employers being close to, of 30 to 34 year-olds with tertiary-level education
or performing better than, the EU average. For is lower (23.7%) than the EU average (35.8%).
example, employees are slightly more likely to be Although this percentage has increased over
in receipt of CVT courses (44% in Slovakia; 38% in recent years in Slovakia, it is still below the Europe
the EU) and the percentage of companies providing 2020 average target and the national target (both
training is also slightly higher than the EU average set at 40%). The unemployment rate of 20 to 34
(69% versus 66%). 2011 AES data show that non- year-olds (18.8% compared with 14.5% in the EU)
formal education and training is more often job- and the NEET rate of 18 to 24 year-olds (18.1%
related (90.7%) compared with the situation across compared with 17.0% in the EU) are higher than
the EU (81.4%). in the EU.
Slovakia 91
Score on VET indicators in Slovakia and in the EU, 2006, 2010

26. Finland
VET indicators for Finland for the most recent year available
Finland 93
Finland’s performance on a range of indicators (29.0%) is more or less the same as the EU average
selected to monitor progress in VET and lifelong (29.4% in 2011). The percentage of 30 to 34 year-
learning across the European Union (EU) is olds who have attained tertiary-level VET (ISCED
summarised below. The chart compares the 5b) (1.6%) is lower than the EU average (8.6% in
situation in Finland with that of the EU based on 2012). The percentage of enterprises providing
the most recent data available (this differs by training to support innovation is also lower than in
indicator). Data in the chart are presented as an the EU (34.7% versus 41.5% in the EU, based on
index where the EU average equals 100. If the data for 2010). While 63.4% of workers in Finland
index for a selected indicator for Finland is 100, report that their skills match their duties, only
then its performance equals the EU average. If 55.3% do so across the EU.
the index is 90, its performance is 90% of (or 10% Based on 2009 data, the employment rate of
below) the EU average. If the index is 200, Finland’s IVET graduates (aged 20-34) at ISCED 3-4 (78.6%)
performance is twice (or 200%) the EU average. is about the same as that in the EU (79.1%).
For some indicators, such as early leavers from Whether these graduates are more or less likely
education and training, a country is performing to be employed than other young people in the
better if its score is below that of the EU average. same age group is also of interest. Data presented
Data on which the index is calculated are here compare them to graduates from general
presented in the table, which also shows changes education at the same ISCED level and graduates
over time. A technical definition of each indicator is at lower ISCED level (2 or below). A positive figure
provided in Annex 1 which also includes the years indicates that IVET graduates are more likely to be
used to calculate each indicator. in employment and a negative figure that they are
less likely to be so. IVET graduates in Finland enjoy
Key points a positive employment premium on both measures.
Their employment rate is 3.0 percentage points
Access, attractiveness and flexibility higher than that of their counterparts from general
The share of all upper secondary school students education (even though this premium is lower than
enrolled in IVET (69.6%) is much higher than the the EU average of 5.6 percentage points); their
EU average (50.3% in 2011). Enrolment among employment rate is also 19.4 percentage points
women is also higher (66.9% versus 44.7%). The higher than that of graduates with lower-level
share of students in upper secondary VET enrolled qualifications (this is higher than the EU average
in combined work- and school-based programmes employment premium of 17.4 percentage points).
(16.8%) is lower than the EU average (27.0% in All these employment figures relate to 2009 and
2011). Adult participation in lifelong learning (24.5%) exclude the young in further education.
is much higher than the EU average (9.0 in 2012)
and well above the average target (15%) set by the Overall transitions and employment trends
strategic framework ‘education and training 2020’. In this section all data refer to 2012 (unless
Older adults, adults with low-level education and otherwise stated).
the unemployed are all more likely to participate in The share of early leavers from education and
lifelong learning in Finland than across the EU. training (8.9%) is lower than across the EU on
Data for 2010 indicate that enterprises are average (12.8% in 2012): Finland is below the
more likely to engage in training than in the EU Europe 2020 average target (10%) but still exceeds
(74% versus 66%), but employees are less likely its national target (8%). Educational attainment
to participate in on-the-job training (12% versus is relatively high: 45.8% of the 30 to 34 year-olds
21%). Participation in employer-sponsored CVT, have tertiary-level education. This is above the
however, is slightly above the EU average (40% Europe 2020 average target (40%), the national
versus 38% in 2010). target (42%), and the EU average (35.8%). The
percentage of people with low-level education
Skill development and labour market relevance (15.2%) is lower than the EU average (25.8%). The
Data from 2010 and related to ISCED 3-4 show that employment rate for the 20 to 64 year-olds is higher
public expenditure on IVET as a percentage of GDP (74.0% for Finland; 68.5% for the EU) and the NEET
is noticeably higher in Finland (1.32%) than in the rate and the 20 to 34 year-olds unemployment rate
EU (0.71%), even though expenditure per student are both lower than for the EU.
(EUR 8 702) is close to the EU average (EUR 8 549).
The percentage of graduations in STEM subjects
On the way to 2020:
Score on VET indicators in Finland and in the EU, 2006, 2010

27. Sweden
VET indicators for Sweden for the most recent year available
On the way to 2020:
Sweden’s performance on a range of indicators Skill development and labour market relevance
selected to monitor progress in VET and lifelong For many indicators in this group, Sweden records
learning across the European Union (EU) is values close to the EU average, but there are
summarised below. The chart compares the some differences. Public expenditure on IVET as a
situation in Sweden with that of the EU based percentage of GDP is higher (0.94%) than in the EU
on the most recent data available (this differs by overall (0.71%) (based on 2010 data for ISCED 3-4).
indicator). Data in the chart are presented as an This is also reflected in greater average expenditure
index where the EU average equals 100. If the index per student; EUR 11 642 compared with the EUR
for a selected indicator for Sweden is 100, then its 8 549 spent in the EU.
performance equals the EU average. If the index The employment rate of IVET graduates (aged
is 90, its performance is 90% of (or 10% below) 20-34) at ISCED 3-4 (84.3%) is higher than the EU
the EU average. If the index is 200, Sweden’s average (79.1%), based on 2009 data. Whether
performance is twice (or 200%) the EU average. these graduates are more or less likely to be
For some indicators, such as early leavers from employed than other young people in the same
education and training, a country is performing age group is also of interest. Data presented
better if its score is below that of the EU average. here compare them with graduates from general
Data on which the index is calculated are education at same ISCED level and graduates at
presented in the table, which also shows changes lower ISCED level (2 or below). A positive figure
over time. A technical definition of each indicator is indicates that IVET graduates are more likely to
provided in Annex 1 which also includes the years be in employment and a negative figure that they
used to calculate each indicator. are less likely to be so. In Sweden, IVET graduates
enjoy a positive premium on both measures.
Key points Their employment rate is 3.7 percentage points
higher than that of their counterparts from general
Access, attractiveness and flexibility education (even though this premium is smaller
Sweden differs from the EU average on several than the EU average premium of 5.6 percentage
indicators in this group. The share of upper points); and their employment rate is 24.0
secondary students in IVET (56.3%) is slightly percentage points higher than that of graduates
above the EU average (50.3%) in 2011, as is the with lower-level qualifications (much higher than
percentage of female students in upper secondary the EU average of 17.4 percentage points). All these
education participating in IVET (53.4% against the employment figures relate to 2009 and exclude the
EU average 44.7% in 2011). young in further education.
Data for 2012 show that Sweden compares
favourably well with EU averages as on participation Overall transitions and employment trends
in lifelong learning: the percentage of adults in In this section all data refer to 2012 unless otherwise
lifelong learning (26.7%) is much higher than the EU stated.
average (9.0%) and well above the average target Sweden performs favourably on these indicators.
(15%) set by the strategic framework ‘education The percentage of early leavers from education and
and training 2020’. Older people, unemployed training (7.5%) is lower than the EU average (12.8%)
adults and those with relatively low-level education and lower than the Europe 2020 average target and
are all much more likely to participate in education the national target (both set at 10%). The share of
and training than is the case across the EU (the 30 to 34 year-olds who have attained tertiary-level
figures for Sweden are around four times greater education (47.9%) is higher than the EU average
than the corresponding EU averages). The share (35.8%) and exceeds the Europe average target
of adults, in 2011, who wanted to participate in (40%) and the national target (42.5%). A relatively
training but did not do so (7.3%) is lower than the small share of adults in Sweden has low-level
EU average (13.9%). Data from the same source education (17.6% compared with 25.8% in the EU).
(AES) show that non-formal education and training The employment rate for 20 to 64 year-olds
is largely job-related (87.9% compared with 81.4% (79.4%) is higher than the EU average (68.5%).
for the EU as a whole). Data for 2009 show that In Sweden, the NEET rate (10.5%) is much lower
the percentage of young VET graduates in further than the EU (17.0%). The unemployment rate for
education is relatively high (43.7%) compared to 20 to 34 year-olds (11.3%) is lower than the EU
the EU average (30.7%). average (14.5%).
Sweeden 97
Score on VET indicators in Sweden and in the EU, 2006, 2010

28. The United Kingdom
VET indicators for the United Kingdom for the most recent year
available Index numbers (EU=100)
Negative
the United Kingdom 99
The UK’s performance on a range of indicators Skill development and labour marketrelevance
selected to monitor progress in VET and lifelong For the UK there are relatively few data available for
learning across the European Union (EU) is this group of indicators.
summarised below. The chart compares the The percentage of 30 to 34 year-olds with tertiary
situation in the UK with that of the EU based on VET attainment is higher than the EU average
the most recent data available (this differs by (16.7% compared to 8.6%).
indicator). Data in the chart are presented as an Based on 2009 data, the employment rate of
index where the EU average equals 100. If the IVET graduates (aged 20-34) at ISCED 3-4 (78.2%)
index for a selected indicator for the UK is 100, is close to the EU average (79.1%). Whether these
then its performance equals the EU average. If graduates are more or less likely to be employed
the index is 90, its performance is 90% of (or 10% than other young people in the same age group
below) the EU average. If the index is 200, the UK’s is also of interest. Data presented here compare
performance is twice (or 200%) the EU average. them with graduates from general education at
Data on which the index is calculated are and a negative figure that they are less likely
presented in the table, which also shows changes to be so. In the UK, IVET graduates have an
over time. A technical definition of each indicator is employment rate 2.4 percentage points lower than
provided in Annex 1 which also includes the years their counterparts from general education (the EU
used to calculate each indicator. average is the opposite, with an employment rate
5.6 percentage points higher for IVET graduates);
Key points IVET graduates in the UK have an employment
rate 12.3 percentage points higher than those with
Access, attractiveness and flexibility lower-level qualifications (the EU average premium
The UK has a relatively low percentage of students is of 17.4 percentage points). All these employment
participating in IVET but a relatively high percentage figures relate to 2009 and exclude the young in
of adults in education and training. further education.
The share of upper secondary students enrolled
in IVET is lower (36.0%) than the EU average Overall transitions and employment trends
(50.3% in 2011). Similarly, the percentage of women In this section all data refer to 2012 unlessotherwise
participating in IVET in upper secondary school – stated.
as a share of all female upper secondary school The percentage of early leavers from
students – at 36.1% is lower than the EU average of education and training (13.5%) is higher than
44.7%. Both indicators have decreased for the UK the corresponding EU average (12.8%); and
between 2006 and 2010 but have increased since above the Europe 2020 average target (10%).
2010. The percentage of 30 to 34 year-olds who have
The percentage of adults participating in attained tertiary-level education (47.1%) is higher
lifelong learning in 2012 (15.8%) is higher than the than the EU average (33.8%) and above the Europe
corresponding EU average (9.0%) and above the 2020 average target (40%). The employment rate
average target (15%) set by the strategic framework for the 20 to 64 year-olds (74.2%) is higher than
‘education and training 2020’. The percentage of in the EU overall (68.5%). The NEET rate (18.0%)
older adults, people with low-level education, and is higher (17.0% for the EU). The unemployment
the unemployed participating in lifelong learning is rate for 20 to 34 year-olds (10.3%) is below the EU
higher in the UK than in the EU. average (14.5%).
Employers in the UK are more likely to report the
provision of training (80% compared to 66% in the
EU, based on 2010 CVTS data). The UK also has
a higher percentage of employees participating
in on-the-job training (30% compared with the
EU average of 21%) but a lower percentage of
employees participating in CVT courses (31%
compared to 38% across the EU).
On the way to 2020:
Score on VET indicators in the United Kingdom and in the EU, 2006, 2010
Part II
Selected EFTA
and candidate countries
29. The former Yugoslav Republic
of Macedonia
VET indicators for the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia

for the most recent year available
On the way to 2020:
The performance of the former Yugoslav Republic Skill development and labour market relevance
of Macedonia on a range of indicators selected The percentage of IVET students graduating in
to monitor progress in VET and lifelong learning STEM subjects (35.3%) is above the EU average
across the European Union (EU) is summarised in 2011 (29.4%). A relatively high share of people
below. The chart compares the situation in the report that training has helped improve their work
former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia with that (95.6% compared with 89.7% in the EU in 2010),
of the EU based on the most recent data available and a relatively high share report that their skills
(this differs by indicator). Data in the chart are are matched to their duties (62.0% compared with
presented as an index where the EU average 55.3% in the EU in 2010).
equals 100. If the index for a selected indicator
for the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia is Overall transitions and employment trends
100, then its performance equals the EU average. In this section all data refer to 2012 unless
If the index is 90, its performance is 90% of (or otherwise stated.
10% below) the EU average. If the index is 200, The share of early leavers from education and
the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia training has decreased compared with 2010 and has
performance is twice (or 200%) the EU average. reached 11.7%, a percentage which is lower than
For some indicators, such as early leavers from the EU average in 2012 (12.8%). Bigger differences
education and training, a country is performing are observed for other indicators. For instance,
better if its score is below that of the EU average. the percentage of 30 to 34 year-olds with tertiary-
Data on which the index is calculated are level education (21.7%) is lower than that of the EU
presented in the table, which also shows changes (35.8%). The employment rate for 20 to 64 year-
over time. A technical definition of each indicator is olds (48.2%) is much lower than the EU average
provided in Annex 1 which also includes the years (68.5%). The NEET rate (32.3%) is nearly twice the
used to calculate each indicator. EU average (17.0%), and the unemployment rate for
20 to 34 year-olds (39.7%) is nearly three times as
Key points high as the EU average (14.5%). The share of adults
with low-level education is relatively high at 35.1%
Access, attractiveness and flexibility compared with 25.8% in the EU.
Relatively few data are available for the former
Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia. In 2011, the
percentage of students in upper secondary
education participating in IVET is relatively high
(60.1%) compared to the EU average (50.3%);
the same is true for the share of female students
in upper secondary education undertaking IVET
(55.1% versus 44.7% for the EU). Data for 2012
reveal that the percentage of adults participating
in lifelong learning (4.0%) is lower than the EU
average (9.0%). Similarly, participation rates in
lifelong learning among several subgroups, such
as older adults and the unemployed, are below the
EU average (though, based on small sample sizes,
these rates should be interpreted with caution).
Since 2006 all the rates for participation in lifelong
learning have increased for the former Yugoslav
Republic of Macedonia, while these figures have
stabilised or dropped slightly across the EU.
the former Yogoslav Republic of Macedonia 105
Score on VET indicators in the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and

in the EU, 2006, 2010 and 2011/12 (where available)
30. Iceland
VET indicators for Iceland for the most recent year available
Iceland 107
Iceland’s performance on a range of indicators percentage point above the EU average (79.1%).
selected to monitor progress in VET and lifelong The extent to which these graduates are more
learning across the European Union (EU) is or less likely to be employed than others in the
summarised below. The chart compares the same age group is also of particular interest. Data
situation in Iceland with that of the EU based on presented here compare the employment rates of
the most recent data available (this differs by these graduates to those from general education
indicator). Data in the chart are presented as an at the same ISCED level and at lower ISCED level
index where the EU average equals 100. If the (2 or below). A positive figure indicates that IVET
index for a selected indicator for Iceland is 100, graduates are more likely to be in employment
then its performance equals the EU average. If and a negative figure that they are less likely to
the index is 90, its performance is 90% of (or 10% be so. IVET graduates in Iceland enjoy a positive
below) the EU average. If the index is 200, Iceland’s premium on both measures. Their employment rate
performance is twice (or 200%) the EU average. is 1.1 percentage points higher than that of their
For some indicators, such as early leavers from counterparts from general education (this a positive
education and training, a country is performing employment premium, even though it is lower than
better if its score is below that of the EU average. the EU average premium of 5.6 percentage points);
Data on which the index is calculated are their employment rate is 11.6 percentage points
presented in the table, which also shows changes higher than that of graduates with lower-level
over time. A technical definition of each indicator is qualifications (this is also below the EU average
provided in Annex 1 which also includes the years premium of 17.4 percentage points). All these
used to calculate each indicator. employment data relate to 2009 and exclude young
people in further education.
Key points
Overall transitions and employment trends
Access, attractiveness and flexibility In this section all data refer to 2012 unless otherwise
In Iceland, the share of upper secondary students stated.
enrolled in IVET (34.3%) is lower than the EU average The share of early leavers from education and
(50.3%) in 2011. Among upper secondary students training (20.1%) is much higher than the EU
in IVET, enrolment in combined work- and school- average (12.8%). While the country has a relatively
based programmes is quite common (46.1%) and high share of 30 to 34 year-olds with tertiary-level
much higher than the EU average (27.0% in 2011). education (42.8% compared with the EU average
Iceland has a relatively high share of its adult of 35.8%), the share of adults aged 25 to 64 with
population participating in lifelong learning (27.3% low-level education is also higher (29.0% versus
compared with 9.0% in the EU in 2012): this 25.8% for the EU).
share increased between 2010 and 2012, by 2.1 The employment rate for 20 to 64 year-olds
percentage points in Iceland but decreased by 0.1 (81.8%) is relatively high compared with the EU
percentage points across the EU. The relatively average (68.5%). The NEET rate (6.7%) is lower
high level of adult participation in lifelong learning than the EU average (14.5%). The percentage point
is reflected in the participation rates of specific increase in the NEET rate from 2006 to 2010 was
groups: older adults (21.2% versus 5.3% in the higher than that observed in the EU; between 2010
EU); those with low-level education (17.4% versus and 2012 this has decreased by 1.7 percentage
3.9% in the EU); and unemployed adults (29.1% points in Iceland but increased by 0.5 percentage
versus 9.0% in the EU). points across the EU. The unemployment rate of
20 to 34 year-olds (8.3%) is also lower than EU
Skill development and labour market relevance average (14.5%).
In upper secondary vocational education, the
average number of foreign languages learned per
student is below the EU average (0.7 in Iceland; 1.2
in the EU in 2011). The share of 30 to 34 year-olds
with tertiary-level VET (ISCED 5b) is also lower than
the EU average (2.5% versus 8.6% in 2012).
IVET graduates (aged 20-34) at medium level
of education (ISCED 3-4) is 80.1%, just one
On the way to 2020:
Score on VET indicators in Iceland and in the EU, 2006, 2010

31. Norway
VET indicators for Norway for the most recent year available
On the way to 2020:
Norway’s performance on a range of indicators Skill development and labour market relevance
selected to monitor progress in VET and lifelong Data for Norway are not available for several
learning across the European Union (EU) is indicators on skill development and labour market
summarised below. The chart compares the relevance. Available data show that Norway’s
situation in Norway with that of the EU based figures are slightly higher than the EU average
on the most recent data available (this differs by for some of these indicators. The share of STEM
indicator). Data in the chart are presented as an graduates from upper secondary VET (35.4%) is
index where the EU average equals 100. If the higher than the EU average (29.4%) (2011 data).
index for a selected indicator for Norway is 100, The share of workers who improved their work
then its performance equals the EU average. If through training is 1.7 percentage points higher
the index is 90, its performance is 90% of (or 10% in Norway (91.4%) than across the EU as a whole
below) the EU average. If the index is 200, Norway’s (89.7%) (in 2010). Workers are more likely to report
performance is twice (or 200%) the EU average. that their skills are matched to their duties in their
For some indicators, such as early leavers from jobs (61.6%) compared the EU average (55.3% in
education and training, a country is performing 2010).
better if its score is below that of the EU average. For other indicators in this group, Norway’s
Data on which the index is calculated are figures are notably lower than the EU average.
presented in the table, which also shows changes The average number of foreign languages learned
over time. A technical definition of each indicator is by students in upper secondary IVET is 0.5 while
provided in Annex 1 which also includes the years the EU average is 1.2. The share of 30 to 34 year-
used to calculate each indicator. olds with tertiary-level VET (ISCED 5b) (3.3%) is
less than half the EU average (7.3%). Data from
Key points 2010 show that companies are considerably
more likely to provide training to support their
Access, attractiveness and flexibility innovation processes (at 58.5% it is 17 percentage
Figures for Norway are close to the EU average for points higher than the 41.5% EU average). The
three indicators in this group. The percentage of score for Norway on this indicator has increased
upper secondary students in IVET (52.6% in 2011) substantially between 2008 and 2010 by more than
is only slightly higher than the EU average (50.3%). 32 percentage points.
The same indicator for female upper secondary
students in IVET is also slightly above the EU Overall transitions and employment trends
average (45.7% in Norway and 44.7% across the In this section all data refer to 2012 unless otherwise
EU). These shares have decreased between 2006 stated.
and 2010 by more than six percentage points in The percentage of early leavers from education
Norway but only by around two percentage points and training (14.8%) is higher than the EU average
for the EU as a whole. Students in combined work- (12.1%) but so is the share of 30 to 34 year-olds
and school-based programmes accounted for who have attained tertiary-level education (47.6%
27.6% of students in upper secondary IVET, in line against the EU average of 35.8%). The same is
with the EU average of 27.0%. true of the employment rate for 20 to 64 year-olds
For several other indicators, the values for (79.9% for Norway, 68.5% for the EU).
Norway are markedly higher than EU averages. The NEET rate of 18 to 24 year-olds (7.0%) is
The percentage of adults participating in lifelong much lower than the EU rate (17.0%). It increased
learning (20.0%) is more than twice the EU average by 0.1 percentage points from 2010 to 2012, while
(9.0%, data for 2012). Older adults, the unemployed, the EU average rose by 0.5 percentage points.
and those with relatively low qualifications are all Similarly, the unemployment rate for 20 to 34 year-
much more likely to participate in lifelong learning olds (4.6%) is lower than the EU average (14.5%).
than is the case across the EU (based on 2012 data). From 2010 to 2012 this rate decreased in Norway
Data for 2011 show that non-formal education and (by 0.8 percentage points) while it increased in the
training is nearly exclusively job-related (98.9% EU as a whole (1.4 percentage points).
compared with 81.4% across the EU).
The share of individuals who want to participate
in training but who do not do so is lower in Norway
(7.4%) than in the EU as a whole (10.9% in 2011).
Norway 111
Score on VET indicators in Norway and in the EU, 2006, 2010 and 2011/12
(where available)
32. Switzerland
VET indicators for Switzerland for the most recent year available
Switzerland 113
Switzerland’s performance on a range of with those from general education at the same
indicators selected to monitor progress in VET and ISCED level and at lower ISCED level (2 or below).
lifelong learning across the European Union (EU) A positive figure indicates that IVET graduates
is summarised below. The chart compares the are more likely to be in employment and a
situation in Switzerland with that of the EU based negative figure that they are less likely to be so.
on the most recent data available (this differs by In Switzerland, IVET graduates enjoy a positive
indicator). Data in the chart are presented as an premium on both measures. Their employment
index where the EU average equals 100. If the index rate is 7.2 percentage points higher than that of
for a selected indicator for Switzerland is 100, then their counterparts from general education (higher
its performance equals the EU average. If the index than the EU average premium of 5.6 percentage
is 90, its performance is 90% of (or 10% below) points); and it is 15.2 percentage points higher than
the EU average. If the index is 200, Switzerland’s that of graduates with lower-level qualifications.
performance is twice (or 200%) the EU average. All these employment figures relate to 2009 and
For some indicators, such as early leavers from exclude the young in further education.
education and training, a country is performing
better if its score is below that of the EU average. Overall transitions and employment trends
Data on which the index is calculated are In this section all data refer to 2012 unless otherwise
presented in the table, which also shows changes stated.
over time. A technical definition of each indicator is The share of early leavers from education and
provided in Annex 1 which also includes the years training in Switzerland (5.5%) is lower than the
used to calculate each indicator. EU average (12.8%) while scoring above the EU
average for 30 to 34 year-olds with tertiary-level
Key points education (43.8% versus 35.8% in the EU). The
NEET rate (8.3%) and the unemployment rate of
Access, attractiveness and flexibility 20 to 34 year-olds (6.1%) are favourably below the
Switzerland has higher levels of participation in respective averages in the EU (17.0% and 14.5%).
IVET and in adult education and training, than the The share of adults with low-level education
EU average. (13.7%) is also below the EU average (25.8%).
In 2011, the share of upper secondary students
enrolled in IVET programmes (65.1%) is higher
than the EU average (50.3%). Combined work- and
school-based programmes account for a large
share of students in upper secondary IVET (91.8%,
which is much higher than the corresponding EU
average of 27.0%). Switzerland also records a
higher share of its adult population participating in
lifelong learning in 2012 (29.9% versus 9.0% in the
EU).

Expenditure per IVET student in Switzerland is
reported at EUR 8 809 compared with an average
of EUR 8 549 in the EU (expenditure data refer
to 2010 and ISCED 3-4). Data for 2012 show that
the percentage of 30 to 34 year-olds with tertiary-
level VET (ISCED 5b) (10.3%) is higher than the
corresponding EU average (8.6%). This percentage
dropped slightly from 11.3% to 10.3% between
2010 and 2012, while increasing from 7.3% to 8.6%
for the EU.
is higher than the EU average (79.1%). Data
presented here also compare these graduates
On the way to 2020:
Score on VET indicators in Switzerland and in the EU, 2006, 2010

33. Turkey
VET indicators for Turkey for the most recent year available
On the way to 2020:
Turkey’s performance on a range of indicators 20-34) at ISCED 3-4 (63.7%) is relatively low
selected to monitor progress in VET and lifelong compared to the EU average (79.1%, data based
learning across the European Union (EU) is on 2011). Data presented here based on 2009 also
summarised below. The chart compares the compare the employment rate of these graduates
situation in Turkey with that of the EU based on with that of graduates from general education at
the most recent data available (this differs by the same ISCED level and at lower ISCED level
indicator). Data in the chart are presented as an (2 or below). A positive figure indicates that IVET
index where the EU average equals 100. If the graduates are more likely to be in employment
index for a selected indicator for Turkey is 100, and a negative figure that they are less likely to
then its performance equals the EU average. If be so. IVET graduates in Turkey enjoy a positive
the index is 90, its performance is 90% of (or 10% premium on both measures. Their employment
below) the EU average. If the index is 200, Turkey’s rate is 11.2 percentage points higher than that of
performance is twice (or 200%) the EU average. their counterparts from general education (higher
For some indicators, such as early leavers from than the EU average of 5.6 percentage points); it is
education and training, a country is performing 9.6 percentage points higher than the employment
better if its score is below that of the EU average. rate of graduates with lower-level qualifications
Data on which the index is calculated are (lower than the EU average of 17.4 percentage
presented in the table, which also shows changes points). All these employment data relate to 2009
over time. A technical definition of each indicator is and exclude young people in further education.
provided in Annex 1 which also includes the years
used to calculate each indicator. Overall transitions and employment trends
Key points stated.
The share of early leavers from education and
Access, attractiveness and flexibility training in Turkey (39.6%) is higher than the EU
The percentage of upper secondary students average (12.8%), but has steadily decreased over
in IVET (43.6%) is slightly below the EU average recent years. The country also scores below the
(50.3%, data for 2011). EU average rate for 30 to 34 year-olds with tertiary-
In 2012 adult participation in lifelong learning is level education (18.0% in Turkey; 35.8% in the EU).
relatively low (3.2%) compared with the EU (9.0% The Turkish NEET rate (35.0%) is over twice
on average). This is reflected in the participation that of the EU (17.0%). Unemployment for 20 to 34
rates of various subgroups. The percentage of year-olds between 2010 and 2012 has fallen from
older adults participating in lifelong learning is 13.9% to 11.1% while increasing in the EU from
0.4% (5.3% in the EU), that of adults with low-level 13.1% to 14.5%. As a result, Turkey reports an
education is 1.5% (3.9% in the EU), and that of the unemployment rate below the EU average, though
unemployed 5.8% (9.0% in the EU). the share of adults with low-level education is much
Young VET graduates in Turkey are more likely higher in Turkey (69.1%) than in the EU (25.8%).
to participate in further education than in the EU
(respectively 35.6% and 30.7%, based on 2009
data).

In 2010, public expenditure on VET as percentage
of GDP (0.40%) is only slightly more than half the
EU average (0.71%). In amount per student, this
translates into a difference between EUR 2 104 per
student for Turkey and 8 549 for the EU.
by IVET students in upper secondary education
(1.0) is more or less the same as the EU average
(1.2, based on 2011 data). But the percentage
of IVET students graduating in STEM subjects
(54.8%) is much higher than in the EU (29.4%).
The employment rate of IVET graduates (aged
Turkey 117
Score on VET indicators in Turkey and in the EU, 2006, 2010

References
[Accessed 8.11.2013]
Cedefop (2013). On the way to 2020: data for vocational education and training policies: country statistical overviews.
http://www.cedefop.europa.eu/EN/Files/5531_en.pdf
Council of the European Union (2009). Council conclusions of 12 May 2009 on a strategic framework for European
cooperation in education and training (ET 2020). Official Journal of the European Union, C 119, 28.5.2009, pp. 2-10.
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2009:119:0002:0010:EN:PDF
Council of the European Union (2011). Council conclusions on a benchmark for learning mobility. Official Journal of the
European Union, C 372, 20.12.2011, pp. 31-35.
Council of the European Union (2012). Council conclusions of 11 May 2012 on the employability
of graduates from education and training. Official Journal of the European Union,
C 169, 15.6.2012, pp. 11-15.
Council of the European Union; European Commission (2010). The Bruges communiqué.
http://libserver.cedefop.europa.eu/vetelib/2010/75928.pdf
Council of the Ministers responsible for higher education (2009). The Leuven/Louvain-la-Neuve communiqué: the
Bologna process 2020; the European higher education area in the new decade.
http://ond.vlaanderen.be/hogeronderwijs/bologna/conference/documents/Leuven_Louvain-la-Neuve_Communiqué_
April_2009.pdf
European Commission (2010). Communication from the Commission of 3 March 2010, Europe 2020: a strategy for smart,
sustainable and inclusive growth
http://eurlex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2010:2020:FIN:EN:PDF
European Parliament and Council of the European Union (2009). Recommendation of the European Parliament and of
the Council of 18 June 2009 on the establishment of a European quality assurance reference framework for vocational
education and training.
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2009:155:0001:0010:EN:PDF.
Annex 1
Short description of indicators

On the way to 2020:
Annex 1 121
(a
%BUBTVQQMJFEBU$FEFGPQSFRVFTU
( b) EU averages are weighted averages of available country data.
On the way to 2020:
Additional notes
In some cases, namely for indicators from sample Work-based IVET: indicator 1020 considers
surveys (e.g. LFS), ISCED levels are aggregated enrolments in combined and work- and school-
to compute indicators. Used aggregations are: based VET as opposed to mainly school-based
ISCED 0-2 (low educational attainment); ISCED
3-4 (medium educational attainment); (ISCED and school-based’ if 25% or more of the curriculum
5-6); tertiary educational attainment. ISCED 3c is presented outside the school environment.
Programmes where the work-based component
direct access to tertiary education and related accounts for 90% or more of the curriculum are
to programmes shorter than two years) are not excluded from the UOE data collection. Under
considered as leading to a medium education these conditions, apprenticeships are included in
work-based IVET.
ISCED 0-2. Employer-sponsored CVET refers to education
In some cases, namely for IVET-related indicators and training paid for (at least partly) by the
from administrative data sources (e.g. UOE data employer. Partial payment could include the use of
collection on education systems), indicators are working time for training.
computed by aggregating data for vocational and
pre-vocational programmes.
Annex 2
Comparative overview of in the levels of various variables in the LFS and

AES has already been carried by Eurostat (13).
selected statistical sources
Comparing trends: adult education different types of training) caused discrepancies in

survey, labour force survey and levels between the two sources. Because this can
continuous vocational training survey also play an important role when comparing trends,
Information on participation in education and we give a short description of the indicators from
training in European countries is available in various the three sources.
Eurostat sources. This report makes use of three: The labour force survey (14) provides annual data
the labour force survey (LFS), the adult education on participation of adults aged 25 to 64 in education
survey (AES) and the continuing vocational training and training (indicator 1050 in our monitoring
survey (CVTS). system which is the lifelong learning indicator in
The LFS and EAS relate to surveys among the framework of Europe 2020). It encompasses
individuals while the CVTS is a survey of companies. all education or vocational training, whether or
The indicator on training participation from the not relevant to the respondent’s current or future
LFS – participation of individuals in education and employment. It also includes courses followed out
training in the four weeks prior to the survey – is of personal interest. It covers all economic sectors.
directly included in the monitor (indicator 1050), as The denominator consists of the total population
is the indicator from the CVTS on participation of of the same age group, excluding those who did
employees in employer-sponsored CVT courses not answer to the question on ‘participation in
(indicator 1030). A third possible indicator on education and training’.
participation from the AES – participation of The adult education survey (15) provides
individuals in education and training in the 12 information on participation of adults aged 25 to 64 in
months prior to the survey – is excluded from this education and training (formal, non-formal and
publication. informal learning) including job-related activities,
This richness of indicators and sources is characteristics of learning activities, self-reported
regarded as an important achievement of the skills, as well as social and cultural participation,
European statistical system. However, with so many foreign language skills, IT skills and background
sources and so many indicators, there are various variables related to main characteristics of the
risks, particularly for non-expert users: confusion respondents. Non-formal activities in AES include
private lessons or courses, distance education,
and getting different, if not contradictory, messages seminars/workshops, and guided on-the-job training.
from the statistics on levels and trends over time. The survey commenced in 2007 and is carried out
To minimise such risks, this annex provides more every five years. The reference period for
participation in education and training activities is the
Its aim is to clarify the main differences across the 12-months prior to the interview. The indicator from
various available statistics and to help the reader to the AES used for comparison purposes is
understand the indicators used in this report and, `participation rate in education and training' and refers
more generally, data on participation in education to both formal and non-formal types of learning.
and training. The continuous vocational training survey (16)
Availability of various sources allows comparing provides data on enterprise activities relating
of scores and trends in these sources. After having to employee skill development. CVT stands for
outlined the main conceptual differences, this annex continuing vocational training, i.e. education and
focuses on trends derived from the sources and training occurring during paid working time or paid,
provides possible, even though not fully exhaustive, at least partially, by employers (if training activities
explanations of differences in trends resulting from are organised outside paid working time). CVTS
the sources. A detailed analysis of differences
On the way to 2020:
Description of sources
in most economic sectors, though not agriculture, perfect. Possible explanations are differences in
defence, compulsory social security, education, to explanations provided for differences in the
human health and social work activities. The levels in the Eurostat note referred to earlier. For
indicator used for information on participation example, the four-week reference period (LFS)
on education and training is ‘share of employees versus the one-year reference period (AES) means
participating in CVT courses’ coded as indicator that the LFS is more sensitive to changes in the
1030 in the monitoring system. Participation in on- duration of courses than the AES. In a four-week
the-job training is asked separately, so not included period the inclusion of a course will depend on
in this indicator.
The table below provides summarised information
on the structural differences between the surveys,
the reference period, sector coverage and the comparison LFS/CVTS, where a test is carried out
population group of the indicators to be compared. to see if this could partly explain the difference).
The table illustrates some important differences Another possible explanation could be that guided
between the three sources. on-the-job training has increased more strongly
and this is more explicitly included in the AES. An
In the remainder of this note we give a brief indication that this can play a role can be derived
comparison of trends for the three indicators. from the CVTS which has a separate indicator for
participation in on-the-job training and has grown
Comparing AES and LFS over the period 2005-10 from 16% to 21%.
For the EU-27, participation rate in education and
training between 2007 and 2011 in the AES has Comparing CVTS and AES
grown by 5.3 percentage points (from 34.9% to One of the largest differences between CVTS and
40.2%), while it is decreasing slightly according to AES is that the CVTS indicator 1030 only accounts
the lifelong learning indicator in the LFS (by -0.4 for employees; AES provides the opportunity to rank
percentage points; from 9.3% to 8.9%). Another the results by labour market status. By limiting the
test of similarities in trends is to what extent population only to employed individuals we obtain
the differences between 2011 and 2007 show more comparable groups. The survey years are
consistency between countries: is there a certain not exactly the same. The period largely overlaps
correlation between the percentage point growth in but is not exactly the same. The percentage point
both indicators over the various countries (17)? The growth of the CVTS indicator from 2005 to 2010 is
+5% (from 33% in 2005 to 38% in 2010). For the
(only for the relevant age groups) is positive and AES, the similar growth rate is 6.3% (from 42.1%
18
). in 2007 to 48.4% in 2011). So the overall growth
So there is a positive correlation, but it is far from has a comparable trend. Another way of analysing
Annex 2 125
the similarities in trends is comparing the trends Conclusion

by country, so the correlation in percentage
point growth is of both indicators by country. The Three main sources are available for measuring
progress in adult participation in lifelong learning:
LFS, AES and CVTS. Each presents its peculiarities
similarities, but is far from perfect.
Trends in participation in education and training
Comparing LFS and CVTS between LFS, AES and CVTS do not parallel
A similar approach is used to test comparability each other. This is especially the case for the LFS
between the indicators in LFS and CVTS. Since compared to AES and CVTS.
CVTS only includes employees, we limited the LFS The LFS, which is used to monitor progress in
indicator to the employed population only. The participation in lifelong learning across countries,
percentage point growth of the CVTS-indicator indicates relatively stable levels over recent years.
from 2005-10 for EU total is +5% (from 33% in However, the AES and the CVTS indicate rising
2005 to 38% in 2010). For the LFS, the similar levels on average and in various countries.
growth rate is -0.8% (from 11.2% in 2005 to 10.4% In comparing these trends it is important to
in 2010). Another test is the correlation in country keep in mind that these indicators differ in various
growth, which is negative (-0.15%; n=21). Both respects, including reference period, types of
results illustrate clear discrepancies in trends training included, and the population referred to.
between the LFS and CVTS indicator: one possible We tested whether changes in duration in training
explanation is the difference in reference period. could be part of the explanation, thereby having
As already explained when comparing AES and
LFS, this means that the LFS (reference period
of four weeks) is more sensitive to changes in the some indications that differences in inclusion (or
average duration of courses than CVTS and AES exclusion) of guided on-the-job training can play a
(reference period of one year). role in the comparison of AES and LFS. These types
If course duration plays a role in explaining the of analyses are only indicative and do not provide
difference between trends in LFS (negative) and a full explanation of the observed discrepancies.
CVTS (positive), one would expect that duration Cedefop recommends, therefore, that, when
is decreasing, having a stronger negative effect looking at participation in adult education and
on LFS than on CVTS. For the EU-27 the average training, readers should continue mainly to refer
duration in 2005-10 is indeed decreasing, from to LFS data, particularly for policy monitoring,
27 hours in 2005 to 25 hours in 2010, so this but keep in mind that, measured under different
could be part of the explanation. The changes approaches and by means of other sources,
in average duration, however, are not so strong complementary and occasionally different
that they provide the full explanation. The same information on participation in adult learning can
can be said when we look in more detail at the be found.
change in hours to explain differences in patterns
by country. When a correlation is made between
the change in hours and the percentage point
change in training participation in the LFS, there is
a positive correlation (as expected). The size of the
correlation is, however, limited to 0.22 (n=21) and
(13) Eurostat (2011). Methodological notes; data from the labour force survey and adult education survey, 14.3.2011.
(14) http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/cache/ITY_SDDS/EN/trng_esms.htm
(15) http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/cache/ITY_SDDS/EN/trng_aes_esms.htm
(16) http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/cache/ITY_SDDS/EN/trng_cvts_esms.htm
(16) http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/cache/ITY_SDDS/EN/trng_cvts_esms.htm
(17) We included only countries for which there were no breaks in series in this period.
(18
On the way to 2020:
data for vocational education
Update 2013
Luxembourg:
2014 – VI, 125 pp. – 21 x 29.7 cm

ISBN 978-92-896-1444-3
ISSN 1608-7089
doi: 10.2801/54941
Cat. No.: TI-RF-13-002-EN-C
No of publication 3066 EN
Free of charge – On request from Cedefop
EN EN
On the way to 2020:

On the way to 2020:
data for vocational education data for vocational education
Update 2013 Country statistical overviews
Update 2013
European policy-making in vocational education
3066 EN – TI-RF-13-002-EN-C
and training (VET) needs to be supported by sound
quantitative information.
Cedefop has selected a set of 32 statistical
indicators to quantify key aspects of VET
and lifelong learning, based on their policy
relevance and importance for achieving the Europe
2020 objectives. The aim is to help describe,
monitor and compare countries.
This update incorporates new hard evidence from
the European statistical system.
The indicators do not claim to assess national
systemsor policies but should be used as headline
figures for reflecting on progress towards the
strategic objectives set for Europe.
The indicators take 2010 as the baseline year and
present statistical overviews for the 28 European
Union Member States and the former Yugoslav
Republic of Macedonia, Iceland, Norway,
Switzerland and Turkey.
European Centre for the Development

of Vocational Training

Tel. +30 2310490111, Fax +30 2310490020, E-mail: info@cedefop.europa.eu

Macedonia Cedefop PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Macedonia Cedefop PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

EN EN

On the way to 2020:

European Centre for the Development

Europe 123, 570 01 Thessaloniki (Pylea), GREECE

Country statistical overviews

Cedefop Reference series; 97

Cataloguing data can be found at the end of this publication.

©European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training, 2014

Printed in the European Union

Europe 123, 570 01 Thessaloniki (Pylea), GREECE

James J. Calleja, Director

The work was carried out under

References ................................................................................................................................... 118

Aim Selecting and grouping

overviews. Detailed monitoring requires much

European VET policy:

Europe 2020 benchmarks for employment, education and training are:

Quantitative benchmarks for education and training on the quantitative targets

0UIFSRVBOUJUBUJWFCFODINBSLTBHSFFEGPS $PVODJMPGUIF&VSPQFBO6OJPO 

The qualitative priorities of European VET policy can be summarised as:

Access, attractiveness and ﬂexibility

policy benchmark. Core indicators also consider continuing VET.

is preferred to one on training impact on career Improving and complementing

types of learning. Developments could include Reading the country

indicator is in Annex 1, which also includes the

Belgium’s performance on a range of indicators training to support innovation (60.0% of innovative

Score on VET indicators in Belgium and in the EU, 2006, 2010

Score on VET indicators in Bulgaria and in the EU, 2006, 2010

Key points Overall transitions and employment trends

Skill development and labour market relevance

Score on VET indicators in Denmark and in the EU, 2006, 2010

Skill development and labour market relevance

Score on VET indicators in Germany and in the EU, 2006, 2010

Key points Overall transitions and employment trends

Score on VET indicators in Estonia and in the EU, 2006, 2010

Skill development and labour market relevance

Score on VET indicators in Ireland and in the EU, 2006, 2010

Score on VET indicators in Greece and in the EU, 2006, 2010

Score on VET indicators in Spain and in the EU, 2006, 2010

Access, attractiveness and ﬂexibility Overall transitions and employment trends

Score on VET indicators in France and in the EU, 2006, 2010

Score on VET indicators in Croatia and in the EU, 2006, 2010

Score on VET indicators in Italy and in the EU, 2006, 2010

Score on VET indicators in Cyprus and in the EU, 2006, 2010

Score on VET indicators in Latvia and in the EU, 2006, 2010

Lithuania’s performance on a range of indicators 30 to 34 year-olds who have attained tertiary-level

Score on VET indicators in Lithuania and in the EU, 2006, 2010

Luxembourg’s performance on a range of tertiary-level VET decreased between 2010 and

Skill development and labour market relevance

Score on VET indicators in Luxembourg and in the EU, 2006, 2010

Score on VET indicators in Hungary and in the EU, 2006, 2010

Skill development and labour market relevance

Score on VET indicators in Malta and in the EU, 2006, 2010

The Netherlands’ performance on a range of secondary school with a STEM qualification

Skill development and labour market relevance

Score on VET indicators in Austria and in the EU, 2006, 2010

Score on VET indicators in Poland and in the EU, 2006, 2010

Access, attractiveness and ﬂexibility Overall transitions and employment trends

Skill development and labour market relevance

Score on VET indicators in Portugal and in the EU, 2006, 2010

Romania’s performance on a range of indicators in upper secondary IVET education is relatively

Access, attractiveness and ﬂexibility Overall transitions and employment trends

Skill development and labour market relevance

0UIFSRVBOUJUBUJWFCFODINBSLTBHSFFEGPS $PVODJMPGUIF&VSPQFBO6OJPO